To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Cover photo: Downtown Asheville, North Carolina at night
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PAT MCCRORY ANTHONY J. TATA
GoVERNOR SECRETARY
June 30, 2015
Dr. Elizabeth A. Baker, Regional Administrator
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
10 S. Howard Street, Suite 6700
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
Dear Dr. Baker:
Enclosed you will find North Carolina's FY 2016 Highway Safety Plan (HSP) and Section 405 Applications for
your review and consideration.
The HSP outlines specific expenditures of funds for FY 2016 and includes brief descriptions of project
contracts that the Governor's Highway Safety Program (GHSP) intends to fund. The project contracts
included in the Plan were selected for funding based on the probability that each would provide a positive
impact on the goals outlined in the HSP.
We are submitting Section 405 Applications outlining how North Carolina qualifies for funding under
Sections 405B Occupant Protection, 405C State Traffic Safety Information System Improvements, 405D
Impaired Driving Countermeasures, 405E Distracted Driving, 405F Motorcyclist Safety, and 405G State
Graduated Driver Licensing.
Included in the Plan are the necessary certifications and the listing of all equipment costing $5,000 or more
for your review.
Additionally, the North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program formally requests a NHTSA Occupant
Protection assessment for FY2016. G HSP will fund the assessment and act as the lead agency for planning
and directing the assessment.
North Carolina anticipates a favorable review of all sections applied for in the Highway Safety Plan and
Section 405 applications. If there are any questions or clarifications needed, please contact me at 919-733-
3083.
?J~'
Don Nail
;[q
Director, G R
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 919-733-3083 LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: 919-733-0604 215 EAST LANE STREET
GOVERNOR'S HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAM RALEIGH NC
1508 MAIL SERVICE CENTER W'VVW.NCDOT. ORGIPROGRAMSIGHSP!
RALEIGH NC 27699-1508
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1
Overview of North Carolina’s Governor’s Highway Safety Program .............................................. 5
History ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Organizational Structure ............................................................................................................. 5
North Carolina Demographics ........................................................................................................ 7
Population .................................................................................................................................. 7
Geography .................................................................................................................................. 8
Transportation ............................................................................................................................ 9
Media in North Carolina.............................................................................................................. 9
Project Selection Process .............................................................................................................. 11
Traffic Safety Project Proposals ................................................................................................ 11
Planning Process ....................................................................................................................... 12
Problem Identification & Target Setting Process .......................................................................... 15
Problem Identification .............................................................................................................. 15
NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan ............................................................................................. 15
Sources of Information ............................................................................................................. 16
Target Setting Process .............................................................................................................. 18
Performance Measures & Targets ................................................................................................ 21
Performance Measures ............................................................................................................. 21
National Comparisons ............................................................................................................... 28
County Comparisons ................................................................................................................. 29
Program Targets ........................................................................................................................ 32
Alignment of Targets with the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan ........................................... 33
Program Areas and Selection of Evidence-Based Countermeasures ........................................... 37
Data-driven Problem Identification .......................................................................................... 37
Selection of Evidence-based Countermeasures ....................................................................... 38
Continuous Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 38
Program Areas .......................................................................................................................... 38
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
ii
Funded Projects And Activities ................................................................................................. 39
Alcohol-Impaired Driving .............................................................................................................. 41
Target ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Evidence Considered ................................................................................................................. 41
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................... 48
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 49
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ................................................................................. 50
Media Plan ............................................................................................................................... 52
FY2016 Alcohol-Impaired Driving Projects ............................................................................... 53
Occupant Protection ..................................................................................................................... 67
Targets ..................................................................................................................................... 67
Evidence Considered ................................................................................................................. 67
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................... 76
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 80
Countermeasures & Funding Priorities..................................................................................... 81
Media Plan ............................................................................................................................... 82
FY2016 Occupant Protection Projects ...................................................................................... 83
Police Traffic Services.................................................................................................................... 89
Target ....................................................................................................................................... 89
Evidence Considered ................................................................................................................. 89
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................... 94
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 94
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ................................................................................. 95
Media Plan ............................................................................................................................... 95
FY2016 Police Traffic Services Projects ..................................................................................... 95
Young Drivers .............................................................................................................................. 105
Target ..................................................................................................................................... 105
Evidence Considered ............................................................................................................... 105
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................. 109
Summary ................................................................................................................................ 110
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ............................................................................... 110
Media Plan .............................................................................................................................. 111
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
iii
FY2016 Young Driver Projects ................................................................................................. 111
Motorcycle Safety ....................................................................................................................... 115
Target ..................................................................................................................................... 115
Evidence Considered ............................................................................................................... 115
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................. 120
Summary ................................................................................................................................ 121
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ............................................................................... 121
Media Plan .............................................................................................................................. 122
FY2016 Motorcycle Safety Projects ........................................................................................ 122
Traffic Records ............................................................................................................................ 127
Target ..................................................................................................................................... 127
Nc Traffic Records Coordinating Committee (NC TRCC) ......................................................... 127
NC Traffic Records Assessment ............................................................................................... 128
NC Traffic Records Strategic Planning..................................................................................... 129
NC TRCC Current Activities ..................................................................................................... 129
Newly Defined Goals Of The NC TRCC .................................................................................... 130
NC TRCC Meeting Schedule .................................................................................................... 131
FY2016 Traffic Records Projects ............................................................................................. 132
Other Highway Safety Priorities .................................................................................................. 135
Targets ................................................................................................................................... 135
Older Drivers ........................................................................................................................... 135
Pedestrians .............................................................................................................................. 140
Bicyclists ................................................................................................................................. 144
Distracted Driving ................................................................................................................... 147
FY2016 Other Highway Safety Priorities Projects ................................................................... 149
NC Highway Safety Media Plan ................................................................................................... 151
Priority Areas .......................................................................................................................... 151
FY2016 Media Projects ........................................................................................................... 152
Equipment Requests of $5,000 or More .................................................................................... 155
Cost Summary ............................................................................................................................. 157
Certifications and Assurances ..................................................................................................... 163
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
iv
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
1
Executive Summary
Fellow North Carolinians,
On behalf of the Governor McCrory Administration, I am pleased to submit this Highway Safety
Plan for fiscal year 2016. Each year, the North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
(GHSP) prepares a Highway Safety Plan as a guide for our State’s federally funded traffic safety
activities. GHSP strives to ensure that funding is allocated to those projects and programs that
can provide the greatest impact on reducing motor vehicle crashes, injuries and fatalities in
North Carolina.
During 2013, there were 1,289 fatalities resulting from motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina
– a slight (0.8%) decrease from the 1,299 fatalities in 2012. As with fatalities, the number of
disabling (A) injuries decreased in 2013. It is encouraging that the number of fatalities and
disabling injuries both decreased from 2012 to 2013. In addition to decreases in fatalities and
disabling injuries, the fatality rate per vehicle mile traveled (VMT) also decreased slightly from
1.24 in 2012 to 1.23 in 2013. Traffic fatalities, serious injuries, and fatalities per VMT remain
near historic lows. Nonetheless, recent trends in fatalities and injuries remind us how important
it is for GHSP to remain committed to funding proven programs and countermeasures to
reduce motor vehicle fatalities in North Carolina.
In addition to fatality counts, fatalities per VMT, and disabling (A) injuries all decreasing, a
number of other traffic safety indicators showed improvement during 2013 including:
 Speed-related fatalities decreased from 441 to 413.
 The number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes decreased from 170
to 153.
 The number of pedestrians killed in crashes dropped from 200 to 173.
 The number of pedalcyclists killed in crashes dropped from 27 to 22.
These decreases are likely due to a variety of factors including ongoing high visibility
enforcement and education efforts, a changing population, and economic factors that influence
driving. As part of the FY2016 Performance Plan, we have set goals to further reduce fatalities
and serious injuries in North Carolina by the year 2016.
Other performance measures showed little change during 2013, or changed in the wrong
direction. The number of fatalities involving drivers or motorcycle operators with a BAC of .08
or greater only dropped by one fatality, from 372 to 371. GHSP is not satisfied with maintaining
the status quo and remains committed to removing impaired drivers from our roadways. GHSP
is funding a number of initiatives during FY2016 to address impaired driving. North Carolina has
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
2
a Statewide Impaired Driving Task Force that created an Impaired Driving Plan that provides a
comprehensive strategy for preventing and reducing alcohol-impaired driving in North Carolina.
Another area of continuing concern is motorcycle rider fatalities. During 2013, motorcycle
fatalities fell slightly from 198 to 189, but motorcyclists now account for 15% of traffic fatalities
in North Carolina – twice the level of 10 years ago (7.3%). One positive finding is the vast
majority of fatally injured motorcyclists in North Carolina were wearing a helmet when they
crashed. In all likelihood, North Carolina would have experienced many more fatalities if the
state did not have a universal helmet law and a high rate of helmet use. To address the growing
problem of motorcycle rider fatalities, GHSP has expanded the “BikeSafe NC” program with a
system of regional coordinators.
Pedestrian fatalities decreased to 173 in 2013 from 200 in 2012. Although crashes involving
pedestrians represent only about 1% of the total reported crashes in North Carolina but
accounted for 14% of all traffic fatalities during the last three years. This shows us that
pedestrians are highly over-represented in fatal crashes. GHSP continues to consider new
approaches to address this growing problem.
The observed belt use rate for drivers and front seat occupants in 2013 was 88.6%, up slightly
from 87.5% in 2012. The most recent observational survey (conducted in June 2014) found the
observed belt use rate had finally surpassed 90% (at 90.6%). Even though seat belt use is now
over 90%, GHSP will continue to support proven countermeasures to increase seat belt use
including high visibility enforcement targeting nighttime belt use and focusing on those
counties with the highest numbers of unrestrained fatalities.
During FY2016, GHSP will fund a variety of programs, projects and activities with federal
transportation funds, which are intended to advance the traffic safety targets set forth in this
Highway Safety Plan. The North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program has identified the
following areas as top priorities for program funding for FY2016:
 Alcohol-Impaired Driving (accounting for 371 fatalities in 2013)
 Occupant Protection (355 unrestrained fatalities)
 Speeding and Police Traffic Services (413 fatalities)
 Young Drivers (153 fatalities)
 Motorcycles (189 fatalities)
 Traffic Records
 Other Highway Safety Priorities: Older Drivers (218 fatalities); Pedestrians (173
fatalities); Bicyclists (22 fatalities); Distracted Driving (126 fatal crashes)
The North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program also requests a NHTSA Assessment for
Occupant Protection for FY2016. GHSP will allocate funding to conduct the Assessment and will
serve as the lead agency on the Assessment.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
3
This document describes the organizational structure of the Governor’s Highway Safety
Program, the problem identification process employed to determine the priority areas and
accompanying goals for FY2016, and the process to select sub-grantees for FY2016. It also
includes the performance measures and targets for the core outcome and behavior measures
as required by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Governor’s
Highway Safety Association (GHSA). In accordance with MAP-21 requirements for FY 2016, the
targets of this FY2015 GHSP Highway Safety Plan are aligned with the goals of the North
Carolina Strategic Highway Safety Plan, which was most recently revised during 2014 and
released, in its final version, in March 2015. Finally, the HSP document includes the reqired
Certifications and Assurances and Cost Summary.
GHSP is committed to reducing motor vehicle crashes and fatalities in North Carolina. We thank
our partners and federal counterparts for their continued support and dedication to highway
safety, and we look forward to having another productive and successful year.
Don Nail, Director
North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
4
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC GHSP Overview
5
Overview of North Carolina’s
Governor’s Highway Safety Program
HISTORY
When Congress passed the Highway Safety Act of 1966, the Act provided that:
 Each state shall have a highway safety program – approved by the US Secretary of
Transportation – designed to reduce traffic crashes, and the resulting deaths, injuries
and property damage.
 Each state's program shall be in accordance with
highway safety standards promulgated by the US
Secretary of Transportation.
 At least 40 percent of the federal funds apportioned
to the state must be expended to benefit local
highway safety activities.
 The Governor shall be responsible for the
administration of the program through a state agency,
which has adequate powers and is suitably equipped
and organized to carry out the program.
In 1967, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted
legislation which empowered the Governor to contract with
the US Department of Transportation for the purpose of
securing funding available through the Highway Safety Act of 1966, Section 402. The Governor
then delegated this responsibility to the Director of the Governor's Highway Safety Program
(GHSP), who also held the title of the Governor’s Representative for Highway Safety. In 1975,
the General Assembly gave the responsibility for the Highway Safety Program to the Secretary
of Transportation.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
GHSP employees are subject to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT)
personnel policies and the State Personnel Act. The Governor of North Carolina appoints the
Director of the Governor's Highway Safety Program as the official responsible for all aspects of
the highway safety program. The Director is the ranking official having authority to administer
the highway safety program.
GHSP is currently staffed with ten professionals and three support personnel. The Director
delegates the day-to-day office operations and functions of the agency to the Assistant
GHSP’s Mission
The mission of the
Governor’s Highway
Safety Program is to
promote highway safety
awareness and reduce
the number of traffic
crashes and fatalities in
the state of North
Carolina through the
planning and execution of
safety programs.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC GHSP Overview
6
Director. The Assistant Director directly oversees and/or influences GHSP’s three primary
sections:
1. Planning, Programs and Evaluation Section
The function of the Planning, Programs and Evaluation section is to develop, implement,
manage, monitor and evaluate a grants program that effectively addresses highway safety
concerns identified as a result of a comprehensive analysis of crash, citation and other empirical
data. This program is the basis for the annual Highway Safety Plan. The Planning, Programs and
Evaluation section is currently staffed with five Highway Safety Specialists. One additional
specialist coordinates and oversees the law enforcement liaison system. Every project is
assigned to a specific Highway Safety Specialist. The Highway Safety Specialist is the Project
Director’s liaison with GHSP, NHTSA and other highway safety agencies.
2. Finance and Administration Section
The function of the Finance and Administration section is to manage and coordinate the
financial operations and administrative support needs of GHSP. The Finance and Administration
section is currently staffed with a Finance Officer, administrative assistant, office administrator
and a materials and points system administrator.
3. Public Information and Education
The function of the Public Information and Education section is to increase the level of
awareness and visibility of highway safety issues and the visibility of GHSP. The Public
Information and Education section is staffed internally by a Public Information Officer.
Additionally, GHSP has the assistance of a Highway Safety Marketing Specialist who works
under the direction of the NC Department of Transportation’s Communications Office with
input from GHSP.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
7
North Carolina Demographics
POPULATION
North Carolina is the 10th largest state in the U.S. The population was an estimated 9,943,964
in 2014 according to the U.S. Census Bureau. North Carolina is growing rapidly – the state’s
population has increased 4.3% since 2010 and 24% since 2000. North Carolina’s 10 largest cities
include Charlotte (809,958), Raleigh (439,896), Greensboro (282,586), Durham (251,893),
Winston-Salem (239,269), Fayetteville (203,948), Cary (155,227), Wilmington (113,657), High
Point (108,629), and Greenville (84,976).
The median age in North Carolina is 37.4 years. Thirteen percent (13%) of the state’s population
is age 65 or older; 24% is under age 18. The population is predominantly white (69%) and
Black/African American (22%). Nine percent (9%) is Latino. The median income in North
Carolina is $46,450.
North Carolina is comprised of 100 counties. About two-thirds (65) of these counties have
experienced population growth since 2010. The table below shows the 10 fastest growing
counties in North Carolina. Many of these counties are in the lower coastal plain and the urban
areas of the Piedmont. Meanwhile, 33 of North Carolina’s 100 counties have experienced
population decline since 2010 including Tyrrell (-5.9%), Washington (-3.7%), Northampton (-
3.6%), Martin (-3.0%), Bertie (-2.9%), Halifax (-2.5%), Pasquotank (-2.4%), Richmond (-2.3%),
Edgecombe (-2.1%), and Warren (-1.9%). Several of these counties are located in the
northeastern part of the state.
Fastest Growing Counties in North Carolina, 2010-2014
County
2010
Population
2014
Population
Growth % Change
Mecklenburg 923,417 1,013,290 89,873 9.7%
Brunswick 108,085 117,852 9,767 9.0%
Wake 906,910 985,320 78,410 8.6%
Harnett 115,724 125,717 9,993 8.6%
Pender 52,409 56,540 4,131 7.9%
Chatham 63,786 68,726 4,940 7.7%
Durham 271,303 292,194 20,891 7.7%
Hoke 47,570 50,987 3,417 7.2%
Cabarrus 178,690 191,080 12,390 6.9%
Union 202,171 215,956 13,785 6.8%
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
8
GEOGRAPHY
North Carolina is
located in the
southeastern United
States and borders four
states: Virginia,
Tennessee, Georgia and
South Carolina. In
terms of land area,
North Carolina is the
28th largest state with
53,819 square miles.
There are three distinct
geographic regions in
North Carolina – the
Coastal plain, Mountain
region, and Piedmont.
The Coastal plain occupies the eastern part of the state and is a popular tourist destination.
Besides its many beaches, the Coastal plain features the Outer Banks, Kill Devil Hills (the site of
the Wright Brothers’
first powered flight), a
shipwreck museum and
lighthouses. The
Mountain region is
located in the western
part of the state and
includes hundreds of
miles of hiking trails,
including the
Appalachian Trail. The
highest elevation is Mt.
Mitchell at 6,684 feet –
the highest peak east of
the Mississippi River. In
between the Coastal
and Mountain regions lies the Piedmont, which is the state’s most urbanized and densely
populated region. North Carolina’s capital (Raleigh) and largest city (Charlotte) are both in the
Piedmont.
Charlotte skyline
Blue Ridge Mountains
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
9
TRANSPORTATION
North Carolina has the second largest state highway system in the country. The transportation
system includes 105,063 miles of roadway, 1,254 miles of interstate highways and 69,450 miles
of rural roads. According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), North Carolina had
6,822,902 licensed drivers in 2013, an increase of 2% from 2012. Eighty-six percent (86%) of the
driving-age population in the state is licensed. FHWA records indicate a total of 7,813,854
registered vehicles in 2013, of which 3,462,557 were privately owned automobiles and 195,479
were privately owned motorcycles.
Multiple vehicle ownership is common in North Carolina. According to the U.S. Census, 77% of
North Carolina residents report having access to two or more vehicles. Twenty-one percent
(21%) say they have access to only one vehicle, while 3% say they have access to no vehicles.
Among employed adults in North Carolina, the vast majority drive to work alone (81%). Eleven
percent (11%) report carpooling to work, while only a small percent take public transportation
(1.1%), walk (1.8%), or bike (0.2%). Almost two-thirds (72%) work in the same county in which
they live; 25% work in another county, and 3% work in another state. The mean time to travel
to work is 23.5 minutes (U.S. Census, 2012).
MEDIA IN NORTH CAROLINA
North Carolina has a large number of media outlets including 153 newspapers, 40 television
stations, and 71 radio stations. The state also has several major business journals, magazines,
college newspapers, and a North Carolina news network.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
10
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
11
Project Selection Process
TRAFFIC SAFETY PROJECT PROPOSALS
Each year, GHSP provides funds for projects that are designed to reduce crashes, injuries and
fatalities in North Carolina. GHSP uses a web-based application system to streamline the
process for organizations, municipalities and state agencies who apply for highway safety
grants. The system is integrated with NCDOT’s Federal Aid, Grants and Financial System and
allows users to view the status of an application and make changes to a contract at any time. In
addition to reducing paperwork, GHSP staff can approve applications electronically. Proper
authorization is necessary to access the system.
Some general guidelines about GHSP highway safety grants program:
 All funding from GHSP must be for highway safety purposes only.
 All funding must be necessary and reasonable.
 All funding is based on the implementation of evidence-based strategies
 All funding is performance-based. Substantial progress in reducing crashes, injuries and
fatalities is required as a condition of continued funding.
 All funding is passed through from the Federal government and is subject to both
federal and state regulations.
 All funding is considered to be “seed money” to get programs started. In most cases the
grantee is expected to provide a portion of the project costs and is expected to continue
the program after GHSP funding ends.
 Projects are only approved for one full or partial federal fiscal year at a time. However,
projects are typically funded for up to three consecutive years.
 Funding cannot be used to replace or supplant existing expenditures, nor can they be
used to carry out the general operating expenses of the grantee.
 All funding is on a reimbursement basis. The grantee must pay for all expenses up front
and then submit a reimbursement request to receive the funds.
 Special provisions for law enforcement agencies include:
o Must conduct a minimum of one day-time and one night-time seat belt initiative
per month and one impaired driving checkpoint per month; and
o Must participate in all "Click It or Ticket" and "Booze It & Lose It" campaigns.
All traffic safety project proposals are due to GHSP by January 31st of each year. GHSP utilizes
an in-house review team to select the best project applications. GHSP Highway Safety
Specialists (HSSs) conduct the initial review of projects based on the applicants’ problem
identification, goals and objectives, use of evidence-based strategies and activities, budget, and
past performance. Specialists also consider whether the application is within the top 25 target
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
12
counties. GHSP then has a review meeting that includes all
GHSP HSSs, the Director, Assistant Director, Law Enforcement
Liaison, and Finance Officer.
GHSP relies heavily on the HSS review of the application, the
summary documentation provided by the HSS, and the actual
review conducted in the group setting. All applications are
projected individually via an overhead projection system to
allow the entire review team to critique the individual
applications, provide input, and ask questions concerning the
individual proposals. GHSP also solicits input from the
Regional Law Enforcement Liaison (RLEL) network or other
partners (when appropriate) as part of the decision making
process.
Risk Assessment
The review process GHSP conducts includes a risk assessment
of the agency and the proposed project. This information is
captured on the project review form initially completed by
the HSS. The risk assessment may include such information as
the past performance of the agency during previous grants
including claim and reporting timeliness and accuracy,
previous participation in GHSP sponsored campaigns and
events, tenure of agency head, agency size, agency’s current
emphasis on highway safety, agency’s highway safety
enforcement efforts for the three previous years, monitoring
results from other Federal agency awards, and any other
incidental or anecdotal information that may provide an
indication of project success or failure. Prior to funding any
project, checks of debarred lists and for known single audit
findings that may indicate a high risk are made. If a project is
funded, but deemed a higher than normal risk GHSP typically will require enhanced reporting
and/or monitoring to better track the project progress.
Once a traffic safety project proposal is approved by GHSP and NHTSA, an agreement is
electronically signed and returned to the applicant agency with an approval letter.
PLANNING PROCESS
Below is a brief overview of the planning process used to identify the projects that will have the
greatest impact in promoting highway safety awareness and reducing the number of traffic
crashes, injuries and fatalities in the state. The highway safety planning process is circular and
The Highway Safety Plan:
The Highway Safety Plan
(HSP) is a compilation of all
the approved highway
safety projects with a short
description of each project
and how they address the
identified problems. The
GHSP Planning, Programs
and Evaluation staff drafts
the HSP on the basis of the
problems identified and the
various approved projects.
The Plan is submitted to the
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration
(NHTSA) and the Federal
Highway Administration
(FHWA) for review. It is also
sent to the Governor and to
the NCDOT Secretary. Once
approved, the HSP is
implemented on October 1
and is in effect through
September 30 of the
following year. For FY2016,
the University of North
Carolina Highway Safety
Research Center assisted in
the preparation of North
Carolina’s Highway Safety
Plan.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
13
continuous. The efforts from each year influence the problem areas and performance targets
for the following year.
1. Solicit potential grantees (January)
Organizations and agencies who are interested in developing projects that address GHSP’s
identified priority program areas are encouraged to attend the one-on-one session at the
Highway Safety Symposium or review the guidelines for project proposals. They are also
encouraged to contact a Highway Safety Specialist if they have any questions. The online
information outlines the priority program areas and the type of grant activities that GHSP is
seeking for the next fiscal year. In addition, instructions and timelines for submitting an
application using the online system are available. Grantees who have received funding from
GHSP in previous fiscal years as well as potential new applicants are encouraged to review this
information.
2. Review highway safety grant applications (February – April)
As described above, the GHSP Highway Safety Specialists review projects and prioritize
applications based on the applicants’ problem identification, goals and objectives, use of
evidence-based strategies and activities, budget, and past performance. GHSP also receives
input from the Regional Law Enforcement Liaison network and other partners before final
selections are made.
3. Project agreements (May – July)
Applicants are informed about decisions on their applications. During this period, the final
Highway Safety Plan and Performance Plan are submitted to NHTSA and FHWA.
4. Monitoring and reporting (August – December)
New grants are implemented beginning October 1. GHSP monitors grantees to ensure
compliance with standards and project agreements. Throughout the year, grantees are
required to submit quarterly progress reports documenting their activities, accomplishments,
and any potential problems that may have arisen. Finally, GHSP prepares the Annual Report
which is due December 31 of each year.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
14
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
15
Problem Identification & Target Setting
Process
PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
The North Carolina’s Governor’s Highway Safety Program conducts an extensive problem
identification process to develop and implement the most effective and efficient plan for the
distribution of federal funds. Problem identification is vital to the success of our highway safety
program and ensures the initiatives implemented address the crash, fatality, and injury
problems within the state. It also provides appropriate criteria for the designation of funding
priorities and provides a benchmark for administration and evaluation of the overall Highway
Safety Plan.
GHSP uses the problem identification process and guidelines outlined in the NHTSA Traffic
Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies and the GHSA Guidelines for
Developing Highway Safety Performance Plans.
NC STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN
In accordance with MAP-21 requirements, GHSP strives to assure that the targets and goals of
the NC Highway Safety Plan are aligned with the goals of the North Carolina Strategic Highway
Safety Plan (SHSP). NC’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan was initially developed in 2004 and most
recently revised in 2014 by the North Carolina Executive Committee for Highway Safety and its
partner organizations. These safety stakeholders include State, regional, local, and tribal
agencies, as well as other public and private partners.
North Carolina is a Vision Zero State—even one fatality is too many on our roadways. This Plan
articulates the way forward to achieve Vision Zero. The Plan’s vision, mission, and goals guide
the development and implementation of strategies and actions to achieve Vision Zero. The
working goal of the revised Strategic Plan is to cut fatalities and serious injuries in North
Carolina in half based on the 2013 figures, reducing the total annual fatalities by 630 fatalities
and the total serious injuries by 1,055 serious injuries before 2030.
The goals of the Plan will be achieved through the implementation of strategies and actions in
nine safety emphasis areas:
 Demographic Considerations
 Driving While Impaired
 Emerging Issues and Data
 Intersection Safety
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
16
 Keeping Drivers Alert
 Lane Departure
 Occupant Protection/Motorcycles
 Pedestrians and Bicyclists
 Speed
Emphasis area working groups (EAWGs) were convened for each focus area and were tasked
with developing a plan for each emphasis area that defines the problem, describes past and
ongoing efforts to address it, and identifies strategies and actions moving forward to further
improve safety in that area. These emphasis areas represent the greatest opportunity for the
safety stakeholders to focus their efforts to achieve the goals of the Plan. The safety
stakeholders selected these emphasis areas cooperatively through a data-driven approach,
noting that many individual crashes can be attributed to more than one emphasis area. For
example, a crash may involve speeding, intersection safety, and occupant protection.
Therefore, these emphasis areas provide an opportunity to address crashes from multiple
perspectives.
The North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program was a key player in the process of
updating the NC SHSP with Highway Safety Specialists and other GHSP staff serving on each of
the EAWGs. This participation allows GHSP to align the targets and strategies of the NC Highway
Safety Plan with the goals and strategies of the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan to the greatest
degree possible. Refer to the “Alignment of Targets with the North Carolina Strategic Highway
Safety Plan” section in the “Performance Measures & Targets” chapter for additional
information.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
A number of data sources are examined to give the most complete picture of the major traffic
safety problems in the state. The sources of information that informed our problem
identification process for FY2016 are described below.
Traffic Crash Data
North Carolina is fortunate to have a centralized source for all traffic data. This data is collected
from the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) as well as from other Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) staff members throughout the state. This data is channeled to the State Traffic Safety
Engineer within NCDOT and is readily available to GHSP and, on a more limited basis, the public.
In addition to the crash data, GHSP has access to North Carolina licensure data (state-wide and
by county), registered vehicle data (state-wide and by county), and vehicle miles traveled data.
Additionally, GHSP has access to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality
Analysis Reporting System (FARS) which is the primary tool for comparing NC data to the
national numbers to identify our state’s ongoing concerns. GHSP compares current year crash
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
17
data with crash data from the previous 5-10 years. This data is critical to monitoring trends and
establishing appropriate targets. The FY2016 Highway Safety Plan includes FARS data and North
Carolina crash data through 2013 – the most recent years available at the time this HSP was
prepared.
Crash data are critical for evaluating the effectiveness of highway safety initiatives and
establishing targets for future years. Within the crash data, each of the following variables were
examined as part of the problem identification process: crash severity (fatal, injury or property
damage only), driver age, driver gender, time of day of the crash, vehicle type, and whether the
crash occurred on an urban or rural road. Crash data were also examined for each of North
Carolina’s 100 counties. The county-specific data were used to rank the counties in terms of
their relative contributions to specific traffic safety problems in North Carolina such as alcohol-impaired
driving, seat belt non-use, and speeding.
Enforcement and Adjudication Data
GHSP conducts highway safety campaigns throughout the year. Law enforcement agencies are
asked to report their citation totals weekly from activities conducted during each campaign
week. GHSP campaigns and reporting deadlines are listed on the GHSP Yearly Planning
Calendar. Law enforcement agencies are also asked to report their year-round traffic safety
activities such as seat belt enforcement initiatives, DWI checking stations, and saturation
patrols. These special enforcement data reports for GHSP campaigns and events are submitted
to GHSP through an on-line reporting system.
North Carolina also has a centralized system of courts administered by the Administrative
Office of Courts (AOC). This enables GHSP to obtain accurate and up to date data on citations
including the status and disposition of cases.
Census Data (State-Wide and by County)
The State Demographics branch of the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management
(OSBM) is responsible for producing annual population estimates and projections of the
population of North Carolina’s counties and municipalities that are used in the distribution of
state shared revenues to local governments. County population projections, available by age,
race (white/other) and sex, are used for long range planning on the county level for traffic
safety problems in the state.
Seat Belt Use Observational Survey
North Carolina’s annual seat belt use survey is conducted each year in June. The last survey for
which data is available was conducted in June, 2014 in 15 counties across the state. Trained
observers recorded information from stopped or nearly stopped vehicles. Data were collected
during rush hours (weekdays between 7am and 9am or 3:30pm and 6pm), non-rush hours
(weekdays between 9am and 3:30pm), and on weekends (Saturday or Sunday between 7am
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
18
and 6pm). Data from the annual seat belt use survey is used to track how belt use has changed
over time, and to identify high-risk populations for seat belt non-use.
Consultation with Other Organizations
GHSP collaborates with many organizations as part of the problem identification process
including the Division of Motor Vehicles, the Traffic Safety Systems Management Unit of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the University of North Carolina Highway
Safety Research Center. The information provided by these agencies is supplemented by data
from other state and local agencies. Federal mandates and the nine national priority program
emphasis areas also influence problem identification.
In summary, GHSP, works in conjunction with a team of partner agencies and uses a variety of
data sources to identify specific traffic safety problems facing North Carolina. Based on this
information, specific targets are established addressing each problem area. The target setting
process is described below.
TARGET SETTING PROCESS
Many factors were considered when setting performance targets for FY2016. The overall
objective was to set performance targets that were challenging, but obtainable. The ultimate
goal is zero deaths from motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina. The factors considered in the
goal setting process included the following:
 Trends in crashes and fatalities: As mentioned above, trends in crashes and fatalities in
North Carolina were examined for the previous 5-10 years. For example, motor vehicle
fatalities have decreased from 1,676 during 2007, to 1,289 during 2013. The fatality rate
per 100 million vehicle miles traveled also decreased from 1.62 to 1.23 between 2007
and 2013. During that same period, reductions have also been achieved in the number
of fatalities involving a driver with a BAC of .08 or above, unrestrained passenger vehicle
occupant fatalities, young driver fatalities, motorcyclist fatalities, and speed-related
fatalities. A primary objective is to build upon this success by setting ambitious, but
achievable targets for further reductions in fatalities.
 Ceiling/floor effects: As crashes or fatalities become rarer, progress becomes
increasingly difficult to achieve. For example, North Carolina has averaged about 15
unhelmeted motorcycle fatalities each year during the past 7 years. This rate is very low,
and would be difficult to improve upon. Rather than spending funds to reduce this rate
even further, resources might be better spent on other problem areas where greater
progress can be achieved.
 The effect of external forces: The extent to which crashes or fatalities may be a function
of external forces or factors beyond the ability of law enforcement, safety advocates,
educators and others to influence was also considered. These may include economic
factors, gasoline prices, changes to the population, geographic, topographic and
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
19
roadway system factors. For example, North Carolina’s population has steadily
increased during the past decade. The larger population – along with the resulting
increase in licensed drivers and registered vehicles – elevate the potential for crashes
and fatalities to occur. However, other factors such as a slow economy and high gas
prices may serve to dampen this effect. To the extent possible, we considered the
potential effect of these external forces in setting targets.
 Effectiveness of known countermeasures: Another factor considered when setting
targets was whether there are known effective programs/approaches to address the
particular problem area. This includes how many effective countermeasures are
available and how powerful they are. With some problem areas, such as alcohol-impaired
driving, there are a number of proven countermeasures for reducing crashes
and fatalities. For example, high-visibility sobriety checkpoints receive a maximum rating
of 5-stars for effectiveness in NHTSA’s Countermeasures that Work. Hence, we set fairly
challenging, but achievable targets for this problem area. With regard to young drivers,
there is only one proven countermeasure – graduated driver licensing (GDL). North
Carolina is fortunate to have an excellent GDL system in place. However, achieving
further reductions in young driver crashes may be challenging given the lack of other
proven programs currently available. There are several young driver initiatives
underway in North Carolina such as the StreetSafe program, VIP for a VIP, and Time to
Drive. Evaluations of some of these programs are currently underway, but have not yet
been completed, so their effectiveness is unknown. The targets for reducing young
driver crashes are therefore somewhat less ambitious than for alcohol-impaired driving.
The FY2016 Highway Safety Plan targets were established after considering the above factors.
The specific performance measures and targets for North Carolina are described in the next
section.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
20
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
21
Performance Measures & Targets
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
North Carolina’s 17 key traffic safety indicators are shown beginning on page 26. During 2013,
there were 1,289 fatalities resulting from motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina – a slight
(0.8%) decrease from the 1,299 fatalities in 2012. The increase seen between 2011 and 2012
likely reflected improving economic conditions in North Carolina and greater travel during that
time. The decrease in overall fatalities between 2012 and 2013 reflects that there has been a
gradual downward trend in motor vehicle fatalities in North Carolina over the past decade, as
shown in the figure below.
Source: FARS 2004 – 2013
Traffic fatalities in North Carolina remain near historic lows. Nonetheless, the rise in fatalities
from 2011 to 2012 was concerning and reminds us how important it is for GHSP to remain
committed to funding proven programs and countermeasures to reduce motor vehicle fatalities
in North Carolina.
As shown in the following figure, the number of disabling (A) injuries decreased in 2013,
continuing a long-standing downward trend. It is encouraging that the number of fatalities and
disabling injuries both decreased in 2013.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
22
Source: NC DOT Motor Vehicle Crash Data: 2004 – 2013
In addition to decreases in fatalities and disabling injuries, the fatality rate per vehicle mile
traveled (VMT) also decreased slightly in 2013 after increasing in 2012. There were 1.23
fatalities per 100 million VMT during 2013, compared to 1.24 in 2012 and 1.19 during 2011.
Once again, the long-term trend suggests a decrease in fatalities per VMT, as shown below.
Source: FARS 2004 – 2013
As mentioned earlier in the “State Demographics” section, North Carolina’s population has
grown considerably during the last decade. Consequently, it is important to consider fatality
rates per capita. The figure below shows fatality rates per 100,000 population in North Carolina
from 2004 through 2013. Similar to the previous analyses, there was a slight decrease in the per
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
23
population rate for 2013. Again, the overall pattern suggests a steady decline in fatal crashes
per capita.
Source: FARS 2004 – 2013 and U.S. Census Bureau
During 2013, fatalities most commonly involved occupants of passenger cars (41%), followed by
pedestrians (14%), motorcyclists (12%), occupants of SUVs (12%), and pickup trucks (10%). As
shown in the figure below, motorcyclists and pedestrians have accounted for a growing share
of the fatalities in North Carolina over the past five years.
Source: NC DOT Motor Vehicle Crash Data: 2004 – 2013
Fatalities among males decreased slightly this past year, down from 927 fatalities in 2012, to
918 fatalities in 2013. Fatalities among females stayed virtually the same, from 372 to 371. Over
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
24
the past five years, about 70% of the total fatalities were males. The overall trend over the past
seven years has been a decrease in fatalities for both males and females, as shown below, but
the decline for males has been somewhat greater.
Source: FARS 2007 – 2013
Rural roadways account for approximately 70% of fatalities each year in North Carolina.
Although fatalities in rural locations have decreased over the past seven years, there was a
noticeable increase in urban fatalities during 2013, as shown in the figure below.
Source: FARS 2007 – 2013
Fatalities also vary based on time of day. As shown by the red line in figure below, the highest
percent of fatalities during 2013 was between 4:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. This coincides with the
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
25
daily “rush hour” and early evening traffic. The blue line in the figure shows the percent of
motor vehicle occupants in crashes who were killed by time of day. The percent of those in
crashes who are killed is quite low – below 1 percent. However, it can readily be seen that a
much larger proportion of drivers and occupants in crashes during the late night and early
morning are killed. The percent of drivers/occupants killed increases sharply after 7 p.m. and
reached a peak between 1:00 a.m. and 3:59 a.m. The overrepresentation of fatalities at night is
evident when considering that only 23% of crashes occur between 7:00 p.m. and 6:59 a.m., but
49% of fatalities occur during those hours. Fatigue, alcohol, and seat-belt nonuse all contribute
to the increased risk of fatal crashes at nighttime.
Source: FARS 2013
The age of persons fatally injured in motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina is shown on the
following page. During 2013, there were 50 fatalities among persons age 14 or younger, a
decrease from the 54 fatalities in this age group in 2012. Fatalities increase substantially once
teens reach driving age. During 2013, there were 78 fatalities among those ages 15 to 19, down
from 88 in 2012. Among all age groups, fatalities were highest among young adults between
the ages of 20 and 24.
As mentioned previously, fatality counts, fatalities per VMT, and disabling (A) injuries all
decreased in 2013. In addition, a number of other traffic safety indicators showed improvement
during 2013 including:
 Speed-related fatalities decreased from 441 to 413.
 The number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes decreased from 170
to 153.
 The number of pedestrians killed in crashes dropped from 200 to 173.
 The number of pedalcyclists killed in crashes dropped from 27 to 22.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
26
Source: FARS 2012 – 2013
These decreases in traffic safety indicators are likely due to a variety of factors including
ongoing high visibility enforcement and education efforts, a changing population, and economic
factors that influence driving. As part of the FY2016 Performance Plan, we have set goals to
further reduce fatalities and serious injuries in North Carolina by the year 2016.
Other performance measures showed little change during 2013, or changed in the wrong
direction. The number of fatalities involving drivers or motorcycle operators with a BAC of .08
or greater only dropped by one fatality, from 372 to 371. GHSP is not satisfied with maintaining
the status quo and remains committed to removing impaired drivers from our roadways. GHSP
is funding a number of initiatives during FY2016 to address impaired driving including DWI
enforcement teams, checking stations, DWI courts, alcohol interlocks, and expedited blood
testing. North Carolina has a Statewide Impaired Driving Task Force that created an Impaired
Driving Plan that provides a comprehensive strategy for preventing and reducing alcohol-impaired
driving in North Carolina. North Carolina conducted a NHTSA facilitated impaired
driving program assessment during April 2015 and GHSP will work on implementing the
recommendations through this Task Force as well as other means.
Another area of continuing concern is motorcycle rider fatalities. During 2013, motorcycle
fatalities fell slightly from 198 to 189, but motorcyclists now account for 15% of traffic fatalities
in North Carolina – twice the level of 10 years ago (7.3%). One positive finding is the vast
majority of fatally injured motorcyclists in North Carolina were wearing a helmet when they
crashed. In all likelihood, North Carolina would have experienced many more fatalities if the
state did not have a universal helmet law and a high rate of helmet use. To address the growing
problem of motorcycle rider fatalities, GHSP has expanded the “BikeSafe NC” program with a
system of regional coordinators.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
27
As noted above, the number of pedestrians killed decreased in 2013 from 200 in 2012 to 173.
Although crashes involving pedestrians represent only about 1% of the total reported crashes in
North Carolina, pedestrians are highly over-represented in fatal crashes. Pedestrian fatalities
accounted for 14% of all traffic fatalities during the last three years 2011 - 2013. GHSP
continues to consider new approaches to address this growing problem.
Finally, several areas have shown little change in recent years, such as older driver fatalities,
bicyclist fatalities, and seat belt use. The observed belt use rate for drivers and front seat
occupants in 2013 was 88.6%, up slightly from 87.5% in 2012. The most recent observational
survey (conducted in June 2014) found the observed belt use rate had finally surpassed 90% (at
90.6%). Even though seat belt use is now over 90%, GHSP will continue to support proven
countermeasures to increase seat belt use including high visibility enforcement targeting
nighttime belt use and focusing on those counties with the highest numbers of unrestrained
fatalities. North Carolina conducted a NHTSA-facilitated occupant protection program
assessment in July, 2013 and many of the recommendations from this assessment have been
incorporated into a Strategic Plan developed by a Statewide Occupant Protection Task Force.
The table that follows provides a summary of the 17 traffic safety indicators for North Carolina
for the years 2007 to 2013.
Summary of North Carolina Traffic Safety Indicators
Indicator
Year
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Fatalities 1,676 1,428 1,313 1,320 1,230 1,299 1,289
Fatality Rate / 100 million VMT 1.62 1.40 1.28 1.29 1.19 1.24 1.23
Number of "Disabling" (A)
Injuries
3,192 2,769 2,473 2,337 2,424 2,273 2,109
Number of Fatalities Involving
Driver or MC Operator w/ >
.08 BAC
497 423 358 389 359 372 371
Number of Unrestrained
Passenger
Vehicle Occupant Fatalities
541 476 416 415 379 354 355
Number of Speeding-Related
Fatalities
622 474 517 487 476 441 413
Number of Motorcyclist
Fatalities
201 169 154 191 170 198 189
Number of Unhelmeted
Motorcyclist Fatalities
14 14 15 11 11 23 17
Number of Drivers Age 20 or
Younger Involved in Fatal
Crashes
270 227 207 202 176 170 153
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
28
Indicator
Summary of North
2007
Carolina
2008
Traffic Safety Indicators
Year
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Number of Pedestrian
Fatalities
Number of Pedalcyclists Killed
in Crashes
Observed Belt Use by
Passenger Vehicle Drivers &
Right Front Seat Occupants
Seat Belt Citations Issued
172
18
88.8%
160
32
89.8%
146 169 161 200 173
16 23 25 27 22
89.5% 89.7% 89.5% 87.5% 88.6%
During Grant-Funded 57,421 50,704
Enforcement Activities
Impaired Driving Arrests Made
During Grant-Funded 15,303 15,789
Enforcement Activities
Speeding Citations Issued
During Grant-Funded 184,969 175,603
Enforcement Activities
Rural Fatality Rate /100 million
3.19 2.72
VMT
Urban Fatality Rate /100
0.69 0.65
million VMT
49,495 44,700 38,099 40,767 43,543
16,145 16,096 13,833 14,533 13,011
176,100 174,250 147,045 148,561 133,794
2.37 2.36 2.07 2.19 2.12
0.56 0.60 0.62 0.62 0.66
Note: Disabling injury data come from North Carolina Crash Data. Observed belt use comes from North Carolina’s
annual seat belt use survey. Data for enforcement activities is reported directly to GHSP from participating law
enforcement agencies. All other data are from FARS.
NATIONAL COMPARISONS
Although North Carolina has seen improvement in recent years across many of the 17 key
traffic safety indicators, there are several areas where the state lags behind the U.S. as a whole.
The table below shows how North Carolina compares to the nation on a variety of performance
measures. All figures are based on 2013 FARS data except observed belt use (which comes from
the annual seat belt use survey).
Comparison of North Carolina to the U.S., 2013
Performance Measure
North
Carolina
United
States
NC +/-
US
Fatalities per 100 million VMT 1.23 1.09 + 0.14
Fatalities per 100,000 population 13.09 10.35 + 2.74
Alcohol-impaired driving fatalities (BAC = .08+) per 100 million VMT 0.35 0.34 + 0.01
Percent of fatalities with the highest driver BsAC in the crash of .08+ 29% 31% - 2%
Percent of passenger vehicle occupant fatalities who were
unrestrained
34% 39% - 5%
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
29
Performance Measure
Comparison of North Carolina to the U.S., 2013
North
Carolina
United
States
NC +/-
US
Observed belt use by passenger vehicle drivers & right front seat
occupants
89% 87% + 2%
Percent of fatalities that are speed-related 32% 29% + 3%
Percent of motorcyclists killed who were unhelmeted 9% 38% - 29%
Percent of motorcyclists killed with a BAC=.08+ 31% 30% + 1%
Percent of fatalities to persons age 65 and older 17% 17% 0
Pedestrian fatalities per 100,000 population 1.76 1.50 + 0.26
Pedalcyclist fatalities per million population 2.23 2.34 - 0.11
Compared to the U.S., North Carolina has a higher rate of fatalities per capita and per mile
traveled. The percent of speed-related fatalities is also somewhat higher in North Carolina than
the U.S., as is the number of pedestrian fatalities per capita. These are all areas where North
Carolina can improve.
Meanwhile, there are several areas where North Carolina compares quite favorably to the
nation. For example, helmet use among motorcyclists is quite strong in North Carolina.
Additionally, North Carolina has a low percent of fatalities who were unrestrained. These are
strengths upon which North Carolina can build for the future.
COUNTY COMPARISONS
North Carolina is comprised of 100 counties. As would be expected, there are sizeable
differences between individual counties in the occurrence of motor vehicle fatalities. The first
map on the following page shows the total number of fatalities in each of North Carolina’s 100
counties during 2013.
The fifteen counties with the highest number of fatalities in 2013 included Wake (73),
Mecklenburg (67), Cumberland (53), Guilford (44), Robeson (42), Buncombe (35), Davidson
(31), Johnston (28), Forsyth (27), Harnett (27), Rowan (27), Wayne (26), Durham (25), Onslow
(25), and Alamance (23). Not surprisingly, many of these counties are also among the most
populous counties in the state.
The second map on the following page shows the fatality rate per 100,000 population during
2013. Here, the pattern is very different. The counties with the highest fatality rate per capita
tend to be rural counties, primarily in the eastern (coastal) part of the state. This part of the
state is a popular tourist destination. Additionally, the I-95 corridor passes through this region.
Since most of these counties have relatively small populations, even small numbers of fatalities
produce high fatality rates. The counties with the highest rate of fatalities per 100,000
population include Graham (56.47 fatalities per 100,000 population), Bladen (45.44), Columbus
(38.10), Perquimans (36.31), Alleghany (36.19), Swain (34.27), Northampton (32.95), Robeson
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
30
(31.34), Vance (28.85), Beaufort (27.21), Pender (26.99), Anson (26.60), Richmond (26.06),
Mitchell (25.96), and Lee (25.28),
Total Fatalities in North Carolina, by County, 2013
Fatalities in North Carolina per 100,000 Population, by County, 2013
To achieve statewide targets for decreasing motor vehicle fatalities, both the counties with the
highest number of fatalities and the counties with a greater than expected contribution of
fatalities per population must be considered. Each of the individual sections of the Highway
Safety Plan (e.g., alcohol-impaired driving, occupant protection) identify the specific counties in
North Carolina where highway safety problems are most significant.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
31
The table below presents the total number of fatalities and fatalities per 100,000 population
during 2013 for all 100 counties in North Carolina. The table also includes the rank of each
county (with “1” being the most fatalities or highest rate per population). The fatality data
shown in the table are from FARS and the population numbers are from U.S. Census estimates
for 2013.
Fatalities in Motor Vehicle Crashes, by County, 2013
County Population
Fatalities Per100KPop
County Population
Fatalities Per100KPop
# Rank Rate Rank # Rank Rate Rank
Alamance 153,595 23 15 14.97 52 Johnston 177,308 28 8 15.79 45
Alexander 37,436 8 53 21.37 25 Jones 10,554 2 89 18.95 33
Alleghany 11,052 4 76 36.19 5 Lee 59,344 15 28 25.28 15
Anson 26,318 7 59 26.60 12 Lenoir 59,046 7 59 11.86 68
Ashe 27,434 5 68 18.23 36 Lincoln 79,745 12 37 15.05 50
Avery 17,872 2 89 11.19 74 Macon 34,151 4 76 11.71 71
Beaufort 47,777 13 31 27.21 10 Madison 21,372 3 83 14.04 60
Bertie 20,595 5 68 24.28 18 Martin 23,750 5 68 21.05 26
Bladen 35,209 16 27 45.44 2 McDowell 45,231 10 44 22.11 22
Brunswick 115,716 13 31 11.23 73 Mecklenburg 991,867 67 2 6.75 94
Buncombe 248,872 35 6 14.06 59 Mitchell 15,407 4 76 25.96 14
Burke 89,519 9 47 10.05 78 Montgomery 27,768 4 76 14.41 54
Cabarrus 186,457 19 24 10.19 77 Moore 91,937 9 47 9.79 81
Caldwell 82,504 8 53 9.70 82 Nash 94,744 21 20 22.16 21
Camden 10,174 1 94 9.83 80 New Hanover 213,809 18 25 8.42 87
Carteret 69,239 8 53 11.55 72 Northampton 21,244 7 59 32.95 7
Caswell 23,844 2 89 8.39 88 Onslow 193,925 25 13 12.89 64
Catawba 155,411 21 20 13.51 62 Orange 139,694 15 28 10.74 76
Chatham 67,620 12 37 17.75 37 Pamlico 13,071 2 89 15.30 49
Cherokee 27,471 6 64 21.84 24 Pasquotank 39,458 0 95 0.00 95
Chowan 14,815 0 95 0.00 95 Pender 55,568 15 28 26.99 11
Clay 10,794 2 89 18.53 35 Perquimans 13,771 5 68 36.31 4
Cleveland 97,429 8 53 8.21 90 Person 39,192 6 64 15.31 48
Columbus 57,739 22 17 38.10 3 Pitt 173,879 21 20 12.08 67
Craven 104,421 17 26 16.28 41 Polk 20,603 5 68 24.27 19
Cumberland 332,553 53 3 15.94 44 Randolph 142,561 22 17 15.43 47
Currituck 24,506 4 76 16.32 40 Richmond 46,041 12 37 26.06 13
Dare 35,273 7 59 19.85 29 Robeson 134,010 42 5 31.34 8
Davidson 163,770 31 7 18.93 34 Rockingham 92,254 13 31 14.09 58
Davie 41,507 4 76 9.64 83 Rowan 138,666 27 9 19.47 30
Duplin 60,104 9 47 14.97 53 Rutherford 67,807 11 42 16.22 42
Durham 286,053 25 13 8.74 85 Sampson 64,313 13 31 20.21 28
Edgecombe 55,704 8 53 14.36 55 Scotland 36,223 9 47 24.85 17
Forsyth 360,471 27 9 7.49 93 Stanly 60,612 10 44 16.50 39
Franklin 62,697 12 37 19.14 32 Stokes 46,731 9 47 19.26 31
Gaston 209,571 23 15 10.97 75 Surry 73,344 11 42 15.00 51
Gates 11,880 3 83 25.25 16 Swain 14,590 5 68 34.27 6
Graham 8,854 5 68 56.47 1 Transylvania 33,220 3 83 9.03 84
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
32
Fatalities in Motor Vehicle Crashes, by County, 2013
County
Granville
Greene
Guilford
Halifax
Harnett
Haywood
Henderson
Hertford
Hoke
Hyde
Iredell
Jackson
Fatalities
Population
# Rank
57,910 8 53
21,073 3 83
507,419 44 4
53,705 12 37
123,316 27 9
59,674 7 59
109,287 9 47
24,621 3 83
50,672 6 64
5,806 0 95
164,974 22 17
40,810 5 68
Per100KPop
County
Rate Rank
13.81 61 Tyrrell
14.24 57 Union
8.67 86 Vance
22.34 20 Wake
21.89 23 Warren
11.73 70 Washington
8.24 89 Watauga
12.18 66 Wayne
11.84 69 Wilkes
0.00 95 Wilson
13.34 63 Yadkin
12.25 65 Yancey
TOTAL
Fatalities Per100KPop
Population
# Rank Rate Rank
4,143 0 95 0.00 95
211,539 21 20 9.93 79
45,056 13 31 28.85 9
964,616 73 1 7.57 92
20,453 0 95 0.00 95
12,826 0 95 0.00 95
52,682 4 76 7.59 91
125,101 26 12 20.78 27
69,754 10 44 14.34 56
81,397 13 31 15.97 43
38,131 6 64 15.74 46
17,921 3 83 16.74 38
9,861,952 1,289 -- 13.07 --
PROGRAM TARGETS
North Carolina’s Highway Safety targets are presented in the table below. The targets
established for the individual program areas are also provided in subsequent sections of the
report.
Summary of North Carolina Traffic Safety Targets for FY2016
Program Area Target(s)
Overall targets Reduce traffic-related fatalities by 20 percent from the
2009-2013 average of 1,290 to 1,032 by December 31,
2016.
Reduce the fatality rate per 100 million VMT by 20 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 1.25 to 1.0 by December
31, 2016.
Reduce the number of serious injuries by 20 percent from
the 2009-2013 average of 2,323 to 1,859 by December 31,
2016.
Alcohol-impaired Driving Decrease alcohol impaired driving fatalities 20 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 370 to 296 by December
31, 2016.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
33
Summary of North Carolina Traffic Safety Targets for FY2016
Program Area Target(s)
Occupant Protection Decrease unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant
fatalities in all seating positions 25 percent from the 2009-
2013 average of 384 to 288 by December 31, 2016.
Increase statewide observed seat belt use of front seat
outboard occupants in passenger vehicles 2 percentage
point(s) from the 2010-2014 average usage rate of 89.0
percent to 92.0 percent by December 31, 2016
Police Traffic Services Reduce speeding-related fatalities by 25 percent from the
2009-2013 average of 467 to 350 by December 31, 2016
Young Drivers Decrease drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal
crashes 25 percent from the 2009-2013 average of 182 to
137 by December 31, 2016.
Motorcycles Decrease motorcyclist fatalities 20 percent from the 2009-
2013 average of 180 to 144 by December 31, 2016.
Decrease unhelmeted motorcyclist fatalities 15 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 15 to 13 by December 31,
2016.
Older Drivers Decrease the number of older drivers involved in fatal
crashes 10 percent from the 2009-2013 average of 197 to
169 by December 31, 2016.
Pedestrians Decrease the number of pedestrian fatalities 20 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 170 to 136 by December
31, 2016.
Bicyclists Decrease the number of bicyclist fatalities 20 percent from
the 2009-2013 average of 23 to 18 by December 31, 2016.
Traffic Records Provide direction and facilitate coordination among the
safety data stewards and stakeholders to improve the
transportation safety information systems in North
Carolina through on-going Traffic Records Coordinating
Committee activities.
ALIGNMENT OF TARGETS WITH THE NC STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN
The State of North Carolina revised its Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) during 2014 and
released the final version in March 2015. The goals stated in the SHSP are to cut the fatalities
and serious injuries in North Carolina in half by 2030; that is, reducing the total annual fatalities
by 630 and the total number of serious injuries by 1,055.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
34
As required by MAP-21, the targets for fatalities, fatality rate / 100 million VMT, and for the
number of "disabling" (A) injuries of this FY2016 GHSP Highway Safety Plan have been aligned
with the goals of the North Carolina Strategic Highway Safety Plan. When trend lines are
generated for these traffic safety indicators, North Carolina is on track to achieve the goals of
the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan of cutting total fatalities from 1,260 to 630, cutting the
fatality rate per million VMT from 1.23 to 0.62, and cutting the number of disabling injuries
from 2,109 to 1,054 by 2030.
The goals of the Plan will be achieved through the implementation of strategies and actions in
nine safety emphasis areas:
1. Demographic Considerations (in particular—older drivers and younger drivers)
2. Driving While Impaired
3. Emerging Issues and Data
4. Intersection Safety
5. Keeping Drivers Alert
6. Lane Departure
7. Occupant Protection/Motorcycles
8. Pedestrians and Bicyclists
9. Speed
It was determined that these emphasis areas represent the greatest opportunity for safety
stakeholders to focus their efforts to achieve the goals of the SHSP. The safety stakeholders
selected these emphasis areas cooperatively through a data-driven approach and noted that
many individual crashes can be attributed to more than one emphasis area.
As noted, the North Carolina Strategic Highway Safety Plan only included specific goals for three
measures. The next page includes a letter signed by Kevin Lacy, Chief Traffic Engineer for the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), indicating the goals of the FY2016 GHSP
Highway Safety Plan support the goals for the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan, in accordance
with MAP-21 requirements for FY2016, and that NCDOT approves the targets (i.e., goals) laid
out in the FY2016 Highway Safety Plan.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
35
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENf OF TRANSPORIXIlON
PAr MCCRORY Ai<THONY J. T A'f"A
GOWKJ'Dtt St ~~ K!: c .·\R Y
June 12. 2015
Dr. Elizabeth A Bak.er
Reg1onal Administrator
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
I 0 South Howard Street
Suite 6700
Baltimore. Maryland 21201
Dear Dr. Baker:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is responsible for the development and implementation of North Carolina's Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) North Carolrna
revised its SHSP during 2014 and released the fina! version in March 2015. The goals sta1ed in
the SHSP are to "Cut the fatalities and serious injuries in Norlh Carolma in haft based on the 2013 figures, reducing the Iota/ annuaf fatalities by 630 fatalities and the total serious lnJUnes by
1, 055 serious injun'es before 2030."
As required by MAP-2·1, the targets for the number of fatalities, the number of "disabling" (A)
injuries, and the fatality rale per 100 million VMT of GHSP's FY2016 Highway Safety P!an are
aligned w:th the goals of the North Caroiina Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Analyses of these
trafftc safety targets show that North Carolina is on track. to achieve tho goals of the Strategic
Highway Safety Plan cf cutting Iota: fatalities from 1,260 to 630, and cuting the number of
disabling injuries from 2,109 to 1 ,056 by 2030. In addition, North Carolina is on t·ack to cut the
fatality rate per million VMT in half, from 1.23 tD 0.62
·rhe targets of the FY2016 GHSP Highway Safety Plan support the goals for the NCDOT
Strategic Highway Safety Plan and in accordance with MAP-21 requirements for FY2016, the North Carolina Depan:ment of Transportation approves the targets (i e., goals) laid out in the
North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Prog·am's FY2016 Highway Safety Plan.
If there are any questions or clar~fications needed, please contact me at (919) 773 2800.
;;~re~l{~
/ /£"3evin lacy, PE
State Traffic Engine
JKL:co
cc: Anthony J. Tata, Secretary of Transportation
Mike Charbonneau, Deputy Secretary of Communications
Don Nail. Director of Governor's Highway Safety Program
MAJUNG ADDRESS:
TruPH WF 919 n~ .2>;(1o LOCAnON:
1~AN <;~O(nii.TI(IN l\.to:li11"('Y .-".Nn SJ.f~TV 01'10",$~ FAif· ~"~9 - 771. ;rr45 !5f! N G*Ht<loi~\l!:t.!JPPRK"t\'1\Y
lOOi MA.Il St:~·~IL.t: c~-~TtH GAPNE-11:. NC 27525
PJ-l..C1~H. ~C 2i~9~·tS!H
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
36
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Program Areas & Countermeasures
37
Program Areas and Selection of
Evidence-Based Countermeasures
During FY2016, GHSP will fund a variety of programs, projects and activities with federal
transportation funds, which are intended to advance the traffic safety targets set forth in this
Highway Safety Plan. GHSP focuses on strategies that have been proven effective in reducing
motor vehicle crashes, injuries and fatalities, including evidence-based enforcement.
Evidence-Based Traffic Safety Enforcement Plan
The NC GHSP has developed policies and procedures to ensure that enforcement resources are
used efficiently and effectively to support the goals of North Carolina’s highway safety program.
North Carolina incorporates an evidence-based approach in its statewide enforcement program
through the following components:
DATA-DRIVEN PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
As was previously noted, GHSP conducts an extensive problem identification process to develop
and implement the most effective and efficient plan for the distribution of federal funds. A
number of data sources are examined to give the most complete picture of the major traffic
safety problems in the state. These include, but are not limited to, motor vehicle crash data,
enforcement and adjudication data, and seat belt use observational surveys. The problem
identification process helps to ensure that the initiatives implemented address the crash,
fatality, and injury problems within the state. This process also provides appropriate criteria for
the designation of funding priorities as well as providing a benchmark for administration and
evaluation of the overall highway safety plan.
The data analyses conducted in the problem identification process are designed to identify
which drivers or other road users are under- or overinvolved in crashes, and to determine when
(day vs. night, weekday vs. weekend) and where (counties and cities, urban vs. rural roads)
crashes are occurring. Behavioral measures, such as alcohol impairment and seat belt non-use,
are also examined.
GHSP utilizes an in-house review team to review project applications and prioritize the
applications based on the applicants’ problem identification, goals and objectives, use of
evidence-based strategies and activities, budget, and past performance.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Program Areas & Countermeasures
38
SELECTION OF EVIDENCE-BASED COUNTERMEASURES
To address the problem areas described above and to meet North Carolina’s goals for 2016,
GHSP focuses on strategies that have been proven effective in reducing motor vehicle crashes,
injuries and fatalities, including evidence-based enforcement. To assist in this process, GHSP
uses the 7th Edition of NHTSA’s Countermeasures that Work (CMTW). CMTW was designed to
assist State Highway Safety Offices in selecting evidence-based countermeasures for addressing
major highway safety problem areas.
Countermeasures will include high-visibility enforcement of alcohol, speed, and occupant
protection laws using enforcement checkpoints and saturation patrols. Associated media plans
ensure these enforcement efforts are well advertised to the driving public.
CONTINUOUS MONITORING
To help ensure these law enforcement projects remain committed to their stated plans, various
tracking mechanisms are utilized to enable GHSP Highway Safety Specialists to monitor the
progress of each project. Quarterly progress reports are required from each agency receiving
grant funding to ensure that the goals and outcomes of each project are met. Projects including
enforcement personnel are required to report on monthly enforcement actions taken,
educational programs delivered and hours worked. During each statewide enforcement
campaign, GHSP requires law enforcement agencies with grant funding to report their citation
totals online on a weekly basis. GHSP also solicits non-grant funded agencies to participate in
these campaigns and report as well. These reports of checkpoint and saturation patrol activities
include data on the locations and times worked, the number of officers present, and the
number of tickets issued. This monitoring allows GHSP to make adjustments to the
enforcement plans for each agency in sufficient time to provide the greatest use of resources to
address targeted traffic safety problems.
PROGRAM AREAS
During FY2016, GHSP will fund a variety of programs, projects and activities with federal
transportation funds, which are intended to advance the traffic safety targets set forth in this
Highway Safety Plan. The North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program has identified the
following areas as top priorities for program funding for FY2016:
 Alcohol-Impaired Driving (accounting for 371 fatalities in 2013)
 Occupant Protection (355 unrestrained fatalities)
 Speeding and Police Traffic Services (413 fatalities)
 Young Drivers (153 fatalities)
 Motorcycles (189 fatalities)
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Program Areas & Countermeasures
39
 Traffic Records
 Other Highway Safety Priorities: Older Drivers (218 fatalities); Pedestrians (173
fatalities); Bicyclists (22 fatalities); Distracted Driving (126 fatal crashes)
The order in which the program areas are discussed generally coincides with their position in
the GHSP overall set of priorities, with the top priorities being alcohol-impaired driving and
occupant protection.
Each program area begins with the target for the problem area (reductions in fatalities,
increases in belt use, etc.). The evidence considered in establishing the target is then reviewed.
This includes crash/fatality data, findings from observational surveys, attitude & awareness
questionnaires, and other data sources. Statewide campaigns/programs to address the problem
area are then briefly described. Finally, there is a listing of projects currently approved by the
review team for FY2016.
FUNDED PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES
The following list includes projects that are included as a part of the original submission of the
FY2016 North Carolina Highway Safety Plan to provide funding for the NC Governor's Highway
Safety Program to carry out the administrative and operational tasks necessary for the office to
function and administer funds received from NHTSA.
A listing of all projects, including the funding level and source, can be found in the Cost
Summary at the end of this document.
Agency: Governor's Highway Safety Program
Project Number: PA-16-01-01
Project Title: Planning and Administration
Project Description: This is an ongoing project that provides funding for the Director and
Assistant Director positions to manage the day-to-day operations of the
highway safety office. This project also provides funding for the Finance
Officer, Administrative Assistant and a Program Assistant positions to
carry out the administrative tasks necessary for the office to function.
CMTW: NA
Agency: Governor's Highway Safety Program
Project Number: SA-16-09-01
Project Title: Programs and Operations Support
Project Description: This is an ongoing project that provides funding for Highway Safety
Specialist positions responsible for administering and monitoring grants,
a Law Enforcement Liason position to coordinate and enhance law
enforcement participation, a Public Information Officer position to
promote and manage events (such as the Highway Safety Symposium,
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Program Areas & Countermeasures
40
State Fair Safety City display and kick-off events), and a Materials
Manager position to coordinate the distribution of information and
materials. This project also provides funding for operational expenses
and highway safety events throughout the year.
CMTW: NA
Agency: UNC - Highway Safety Research Center
Project Number: SA-16-09-03
Project Title: Highway Safety Plan and Annual Report
Project Description: This is an ongoing project to prepare the North Carolina Highway Safety
Plan and the Governor's Highway Safety Program's Annual Report.
CMTW: NA
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
41
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
TARGET
 GHSP’s goal is to decrease alcohol impaired driving fatalities 20 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 370 to 296 by December 31, 2016.
EVIDENCE CONSIDERED
Crashes, Deaths, and Injuries
During 2013, 371 persons were killed in crashes in North Carolina involving a driver or
motorcycle operator with a BAC of .08 or above. This is unchanged from the 372 alcohol-involved
fatalities in 2012. As shown in the figure below, North Carolina has demonstrated a
gradual decline in traffic fatalities involving an impaired driver.
Source: FARS 2004 - 2013
Based on the current trend, North Carolina will experience approximately 325 alcohol-impairing
driving fatalities in 2016. The GHSP believes that number can be further reduced through a
combination of enforcement and educational programs designed to deter driving while
impaired. Hence, we have set a target that reduces alcohol-impaired driving fatalities by 20
percent, to 296 fatalities by 2016.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
42
The percent of fatalities that involve an impaired driver has been very consistent since 2004.
Slightly fewer than 30 percent of fatalities in North Carolina have involved a driver with a BAC
of .08 or above. In 2013, 29% of fatalities involved an impaired driver.
During 2013, there were 0.35 alcohol-impaired driving fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles
traveled (VMT). This figure is unchanged for the past three years. The longer-term trend,
however, is a decrease in alcohol-impaired fatalities per VMT, as shown below.
Source: FARS 2007 – 2013 and FHWA
As mentioned in the “State Demographics” section, North Carolina’s population has grown
considerably during the last decade. Consequently, it is important to consider fatality rates per
capita. The figure on the following page shows alcohol-impaired driving fatalities per 100,000
population in North Carolina from 2007 through 2013. Similar to the previous analyses, there
has been little meaningful change in recent years, although the overall pattern suggests a
decline in alcohol-impaired fatalities per capita.
In addition to the 371 alcohol-impaired driving fatalities during 2013, there were 341 serious
(“A”) injuries, 4,720 less severe injuries, and 4,976 property damage only crashes. Alcohol is less
often involved in non-fatal crashes. Among all drivers in crashes in North Carolina during 2013,
2.9% had been drinking (based on the judgment of the law enforcement officer who completed
the crash report form). This is slightly lower than in 2012 (3.1%).
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
43
Source: FARS 2007 – 2013
Alcohol-involvement in crashes was higher among males than females: 4.0% versus 1.5%.
Additionally, alcohol involvement was more common among drivers involved in rural crashes
(4.1%) than urban crashes (2.1%). Rural roadways are inherently more dangerous than urban
roadways, and they can be particularly difficult to handle if a driver has been drinking.
Alcohol-involvement also varies substantially by the age of the driver. As shown in the first
figure on the following page, alcohol involvement is highest among crash-involved drivers
between the ages of 21 and 34. Contrary to popular notion, North Carolina’s youngest drivers
seldom drink and drive. The percent of 16 and 17 year-old crash-involved drivers who had been
drinking is comparable to that of drivers age 65 and older.
Drivers of different vehicle types also vary in their rate of alcohol-involvement in crashes (see
the second figure on the following page). Alcohol-involvement in crashes is highest among
riders of motorcycles and mopeds/scooters. During 2013, 8% of motorcycle and 9% of
moped/scooter crashes involved a driver who had been drinking. Compared to 2012, however,
alcohol-involvement decreased noticeably for riders of motorcycles and mopeds/scooters.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
44
Source: NC Motor Vehicle Crash Data 2013
Source: NC Motor Vehicle Crash Data 2012-2013
The figure below shows the number (left axis, blue bars) and percent (right axis, red
line) of
crashes involving alcohol by time of day. Both the number and percent of alcohol-involved
crashes peaks at 2 a.m. During 2013, there were 940 crashes involving alcohol between 2:00–
2:59 a.m., accounting for approximately 28% of all crashes at that hour of day. Generally
speaking, the hours of 1 a.m. to 3 a.m. represents a period with a very high concentration of
alcohol-involved crashes.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
45
Source: NC Motor Vehicle Crash Data 2013
North Carolina has 100 counties. The following table shows the 39 counties with the most
fatalities in crashes from 2009 to 2013 involving a driver with a BAC of .08 or above. Wake and
Mecklenburg counties had the most alcohol-involved fatalities during this period, followed by
Cumberland, Robeson, and Guilford counties. Altogether, the 39 counties listed in the table
account for 76% of all alcohol-involved fatalities in North Carolina’s from 2009 to 2013. The
table also shows the alcohol-involved fatality rate per 10,000 population. Note that many of the
counties with high per capita rates of alcohol-involved fatalities are located in the southeastern
part of the state (e.g., Robeson, Columbus, and Hoke counties) or along the border with Virginia
(e.g., Stokes, Vance, Granville and Halifax counties).
Fatalities in Crashes Involving a Driver with a BAC of .08 or Above, 2009-2013
County
Fatalities in
alcohol-involved
crashes
Fatalities per 10,000
population
% of all alcohol
involved fatalities
Wake 105 0.22 5.72%
Mecklenburg 104 0.21 5.66%
Cumberland 78 0.47 4.25%
Robeson 75 1.12 4.08%
Guilford 74 0.29 4.03%
Forsyth 53 0.29 2.89%
Johnston 47 0.53 2.56%
Onslow 44 0.45 2.40%
Catawba 41 0.53 2.23%
Davidson 41 0.50 2.23%
Harnett 37 0.60 2.02%
Brunswick 35 0.60 1.91%
Wayne 35 0.56 1.91%
Columbus 34 1.18 1.85%
Iredell 33 0.40 1.80%
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
46
Co
Fatalities in Crashes Involving a Driver with a BAC of .08 or Above, 2009-2013
unty
Fatalities in
alcohol-involved
crashes
Fatalities per 10,000
population
% of all alcohol
involved fatalities
Union 32 0.30 1.74%
Rowan 30 0.43 1.63%
Nash 29 0.61 1.58%
Randolph 29 0.41 1.58%
Pitt 27 0.31 1.47%
Buncombe 26 0.21 1.42%
Durham 26 0.18 1.42%
Gaston 25 0.24 1.36%
New Hanover 24 0.22 1.31%
Rockingham 24 0.52 1.31%
Alamance 23 0.30 1.25%
Wilson 23 0.57 1.25%
Granville 22 0.76 1.20%
Stokes 22 0.94 1.20%
Cabarrus 21 0.23 1.14%
Sampson 21 0.65 1.14%
Hoke 20 0.79 1.09%
Surry 20 0.55 1.09%
Vance 20 0.89 1.09%
Craven 19 0.36 1.03%
Halifax 19 0.71 1.03%
Pender 19 0.68 1.03%
Caldwell 18 0.44 0.98%
Orange 18 0.26 0.98%
Attitudes & Awareness
The Governor’s Highway Safety Progra
Source: FARS 2009 -2013
m conducted a statewide telephone survey in December,
2012, including a standard series of questions recommended by NHTSA, to gauge public opinion
and awareness of occupant protection issues. A random sample of 601 North Carolina residents
age 15½ or older who were licensed to drive a motor vehicle were interviewed between
December 9 and December 19, 2012.
Thirty-seven percent (37%) of respondents reported having consumed at least one alcoholic
drink during the previous 30 days, a figure that is noticeably lower than 2010 (45%) and 2011
(43%). Among this group, 24% reported they had driven a vehicle within two hours after
drinking during the past month. This is similar to the percent (22%) who reported drinking and
driving in the 2011 survey.
More than six out of ten respondents (62%) reported having read, seen or heard something
about drunk driving enforcement by police during the previous 30 days. This compares to 60%
in the 2011 survey. Most respondents believe the chances are good that drinking drivers will be
arrested. Half (49%) of respondents said drivers are “very likely” to be arrested if they drive
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
47
after drinking (comparable to 50% in 2011. Only 8% said it is “not very likely” a person who
drinks and drives will be arrested.
Respondents were asked about their familiarity with six impaired driving messages and
campaigns. As sown on the following page, “Friends Don’t Let Friends Drive Drunk” and “Booze
It & Lose It” are clearly the most recognizable impaired driving messages/campaigns in North
Carolina, rated as “very familiar” by 87% and 75% of respondents, respectively. Awareness of
both messages has decreased somewhat since 2011. Respondents are considerably less familiar
with other messages/campaigns including Over the Limit, Under Arrest (23% “very familiar”),
Checkpoint Strikeforce (16%), Sober or Slammer (14%), and Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over
(21%).
Finally, respondents were asked whether they favored or opposed five potential penalties for
drinking drivers. Eighty-two percent (82%) favor increasing the fine for drunk driving, while
nearly as many support lengthening the suspension period for those who drink and drive (77%).
The survey findings also show strong support for lengthening the revocation period of a driver’s
license for convicted offenders (74%) and attaching a breath testing device on an offender’s
vehicle (73%). The only penalty not favored by a majority of respondents is a lowering of the
blood alcohol level to be considered driving under the influence, which is favored by 39% of
respondents. Opinions about penalties for drinking drivers have changed little since 2011.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
48
STATEWIDE CAMPAIGNS/PROGRAMS
Enforcement Activities
During 2014, law enforcement agencies in North Carolina conducted five waves of the Booze It
& Lose It campaign:
 St. Patrick’s Day Booze It & Lose It (March 14-17)
 Booze It & Lose It: Operation Firecracker (June 27-July 6)
 Labor Day Booze It & Lose It (August 15-September 1)
 Halloween Booze It & Lose It (October 31-November 3)
 Holiday Booze It & Lose It (December 12-January 4, 2014)
Across all five waves, 37,094 checkpoints and saturation patrols were conducted, resulting in a
total of 9,332 DWI charges (see the table below). Compared to 2013, 20% fewer checkpoints
and saturation patrols were conducted during Booze It & Lose It enforcement activities in 2014;
however, these activities resulted in roughly the same number of DWI charges.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
Checkpoints and DWI Charges
2014 2015
St. Patrick’s Day Booze It & Lose It
Checkpoints and saturation patrols 3,959 2,391
DWI charges 815 690
Booze It & Lose It: Operation Firecracker
Checkpoints and saturation patrols 8,018 7,682
DWI charges 1,929 1,737
Labor Day Booze It & Lose It
Checkpoints and saturation patrols 9,642 13,386
DWI charges 2,757 2,866
Halloween Booze It & Lose It
Checkpoints and saturation patrols 1,701 4,340
DWI charges 583 842
Holiday Booze It & Lose It
Checkpoints and saturation patrols 13,774 18,441
DWI charges 3,248 3,164
Totals
Checkpoints and saturation patrols 37,094 46,240
DWI charges 9,332 9,299
The information about checkpoint activity and DWI charges was provided to GHSP, as required,
by law enforcement agencies participating in Booze It & Lose It enhanced enforcement periods.
Each campaign included approximately 400 participating law enforcement agencies across the
state, including local police departments, Sheriff’s departments, and the NC State Highway
Patrol.
In addition to DWI charges, the five waves of the Booze It & Lose It campaign during 2014 also
resulted in 22,616 charges for occupant restraint violations, 10,212 arrests for drug violations,
8,304 fugitives apprehended, and 21,650 citations for driving without a license. An additional
2,837 DWI charges were made during other enhanced enforcement periods in 2014, such as
Click It or Ticket.
SUMMARY
During 2014, there was little change in alcohol-impaired driving in North Carolina. The number
of fatalities involving drivers or motorcycle operators with a BAC of .08 or greater dropped by
only one fatality (from 372 to 371). In addition, the percent of fatalities involving alcohol and
the rate of alcohol-impaired fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled were unchanged in
2013.
49
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
50
As in previous years, there continue to be certain groups who are at higher risk for alcohol
involvement in crashes. This includes males, drivers 21 to 29, motorcycle and motor-scooter
riders, and drivers on rural roadways. Alcohol-involved crashes are most common at nighttime,
especially during the hours of midnight to 3 a.m. The counties that account for the most
alcohol-involved fatalities are Wake, Mecklenburg, Cumberland, Robeson, and Guilford
counties.
GHSP is not satisfied with maintaining the status quo and remains committed to removing
impaired drivers from our roadways. To adjust for the confounding effect of economic
conditions, five year averages were used as the baseline for setting goals. GHSP is working
toward a reduction of 20% in fatalities by 2016 involving drivers with a BAC of .08 or above.
COUNTERMEASURES AND FUNDING PRIORITIES
To address the problem areas described above and to meet North Carolina’s goals for 2016,
GHSP focuses on strategies that have been proven effective in reducing motor vehicle crashes,
injuries and fatalities, including evidence-based enforcement. To assist in this process, GHSP
uses the 7th Edition of NHTSA’s Countermeasures that Work (CMTW). CMTW was designed to
assist State Highway Safety Offices in selecting evidence-based countermeasures for addressing
major highway safety problem areas.
GHSP is implementing an initiative to establish DWI Enforcement Teams in counties that were
overrepresented in alcohol-related fatalities. GHSP crafted the initiative to encourage law
enforcement agencies in the identified counties to focus their enforcement efforts on days and
times that impaired drivers were most likely to be on the roadways – typically Thursday, Friday,
and Saturday nights between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. the following morning. During FY2016, GHSP
will fund teams in Buncombe, Brunswick, Forsyth, Guilford, Mecklenburg, Union, Wake and
Wayne counties. GHSP will also fund a State Highway Patrol DWI Enforcement Team to work in
Columbus, Cumberland and Robeson counties. Collectively, these nine counties accounted for
more than 30 percent of the alcohol-involved fatalities in North Carolina during the past five
years, and they include the five counties with the highest number of fatalities. By focusing
proven enforcement strategies in this select group of counties, GHSP expects to maximize the
impact with the resources available. In addition, GHSP will encourage more communities that
are overrepresented in alcohol-related fatalities to be involved in the DWI Enforcement Team
approach. GHSP will provide access to data and county maps to these communities to
communicate the location of impaired driving crashes, injuries, and fatalities, as well as the
time of day and day of week that these are occurring. Access to data will be provided to other
areas of the State as well, in order to assist them with focusing their enforcement efforts in the
most appropriate locations and times.
GHSP is also committed to supporting enforcement efforts statewide and particularly to the
support of agencies that seek assistance to establish impaired driving checking stations.
Checking stations have been proven by NHTSA to be extremely effective in curbing impaired
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
driving and are supported by an overwhelming percentage of the population. GHSP is also fully
supportive of the continued operation and expansion of the North Carolina BAT Mobile
Program, operated by the Forensic Tests for Alcohol Branch. This program has been in
operation since 1996 and since the program’s inception has resulted in almost 2,300 checking
stations and netted over 12,000 DWI arrests. During FY2016, GHSP is funding four new B.A.T.
Mobile Units to meet demand for on-site impaired driver processing by law enforcement. This
will allow for units to be deployed regionally assuring additional checking station coverage
throughout the State.
GHSP is dedicated to the continued prosecution of impaired drivers and will support the North
Carolina Conference of District Attorneys’ (CDA) efforts to train more prosecutors and law
enforcement officers statewide. During FY2016, GHSP plans to continue support for Dedicated
DWI Treatment Courts in two counties (Buncombe and Cumberland). DWI Courts deal only with
impaired driving cases and are proven to reduce recidivism among offenders. GHSP plans to
establish and implement more DWI Courts and will evaluate assistance in other counties where
GHSP funds dedicated DWI Enforcement Teams. During FY2016, GHSP will continue to support
a DRE coordinator, who will schedule trainings across the state to help officers detect impaired
driving suspects under the influence of drugs. The DRE coordinator will also provide training for
DRE’s and DRE instructors to ensure state of the art training for all certified DRE personnel in
North Carolina.
Currently, approximately 10,000 alcohol interlocks are installed in the vehicles of DWI offenders
in North Carolina. During 2016, GHSP will provide funding to DMV for hardware and software
improvements to upgrade the interlock system. DMV is responsible for monitoring and
overseeing the ignition interlock program in the state. With more participants, vendors and
legislative mandates, the ignition interlock program has increased exponentially over the past
several years. The DMV is having difficulty maintaining the overall effectiveness of the program
because it is still a manual process. The goal is to streamline this process by creating an
automated system. The new web based system will integrate with the different vendors and
will increase efficiency and effectiveness in collecting and monitoring the data that is reported
to the state.
The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) laboratory does the blood alcohol testing
for the majority of law enforcement agencies in North Carolina. Because of a recent court
decision that requires the right to confront your accuser, the length between when a blood
analysis is submitted to the time it takes for the technician to testify in court is up to 18
months. Valuable time is being spent traveling between counties statewide to testify on the
analysis procedures and the results. During FY2016, GHSP will continue funding laboratories in
Wake County, Pitt County, and Wilmington to expand their existing blood alcohol testing
facilities and to expedite the blood alcohol analysis.
GHSP has worked with Governor Pat McCrory to establish a Statewide Impaired Driving Task
Force. The Task Force met on four occasions during FY2015. The focus of these meeting was
51
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
52
legislative items the Task Force wanted to pursue for the long session of the General Assembly
in 2015. Additionally, the Task Force approved an updated Impaired Driving Plan in June of
2014. The purpose of the Plan is to provide a comprehensive strategy for preventing and
reducing alcohol-impaired driving in North Carolina. Finally, GHSP conducted a NHTSA Impaired
Driving Assessment during FY2015. GHSP was the lead agency on this Assessment.
MEDIA PLAN
GHSP will support all of the fore mentioned FY2016 impaired driving campaigns with earned
and/or paid media to draw attention to each of the campaigns. North Carolina utilizes a variety
of media modes to draw attention to the campaigns and the enforcement efforts in the state.
Campaign kickoff events are planned for all FY2016 campaigns, seeking earned media attention
that will be gained from partnerships with NC DOT Communications Office, MADD, NC State
Highway Patrol, local law enforcement, Conference of District Attorney’s, etc. Typically, the
kickoff events will feature the GHSP Director, state law enforcement, local law enforcement,
and often victims, survivors, or offenders. At times GHSP will change the typical kickoff format
to draw attention to a variety of impaired driving issues.
GHSP will continue partnerships with all major universities in the state. The messaging and
enforcement will focus on the issue of alcohol abuse at college sporting events. GHSP will
promote “Booze It & Lose It” throughout the school year on campuses through targeted sports
marketing and media campaigns.
GHSP also plans to continue the partnership with the National Football League (NFL) Carolina
Panthers to address impaired driving associated with tailgating and game attendance at
Carolina Panther events. This will consist of venue signage and possibly utilizing radio
advertising.
GHSP also plans to continue the partnership with the National Hockey League (NHL) Carolina
Hurricanes to address alcohol use with their fan base. This will consist of venue signage visible
to all fans in attendance or watching on television and will be targeted specifically during the
Holiday “Booze It & Lose It” campaign. Certain signage is also visible all year long for those who
attend other events at PNC arena such as concerts or events at neighboring Carter Finley
Stadium.
GHSP and the Charlotte Hornets plan to continue their partnership for a third upcoming season.
Majority of the signage within the venue is visible all year long which includes concerts and the
Charlotte Checkers Hockey games.
GHSP also partners with eight of the nine minor league baseball clubs in the state to advertise
the ”Booze It & Lose It” message. The messaging coincides with the Operation Firecracker and
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
Labor Day campaigns. Advertising at the ballparks includes outfield signage and program
advertisement.
As a pilot program, GHSP is continuing its partnership with Oak City 7, a downtown Raleigh
concert series, with hopes to expand to all Live Nation concert venues in North Carolina during
the next fiscal year. Alcohol consumption is high at concerts and GHSP recognizes this is a key
setting for reaching our target audience.
Additional advertising will be done through our agency of record. Marketing and advertising
efforts are becoming more progressive with the ability to micro-target our audience and utilize
a variety of mediums to ensure “Booze It & Lose It” makes the most effective use of messaging.
Paid media will be utilized during enforcement periods and certain months when increased
alcohol-related fatalities occur. In-house social media will also be used throughout the entire
year with messaging targeting key demographics and areas.
FY2016 ALCOHOL-IMPAIRED DRIVING PROJECTS
The following section outlines projects that are currently approved by the review team and
officially part of the original submission of the FY2016 North Carolina Highway Safety Plan to
address alcohol-impaired driving. A listing of all projects, including the funding level and source,
can be found in the Cost Summary at the end of this document. (Note: CMTW = NHTSA’s
Countermeasures that Work).
Agency: Governor's Highway Safety Program
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-01
Project Title: Alcohol Programs Coordination
Project Description: This is an ongoing project with the North Carolina Governor's Highway
Safety Program (GHSP) to address the impaired driving issue. The goal of
GHSP is to reduce alcohol-related fatalities by 20% from the 2009-2013
average of 370 to 296. This project provides funding to promote the
"Booze It & Lose" campaign statewide. This project also funds the annual
DWI Task Force Summit for all current and anticipated DWI teams. GHSP
developed innovative and creative concept called "DWI Task Forces" to
address the impaired driving issue. The Task Forces are assembled from
multiple agencies and primarily work nights and weekends to focus on
apprehending impaired drivers. The primary purpose of the summit is to
have the teams from all over the state to collaborate and share their
individual successes, accomplishments and lessons learned in an effort to
help and lead others.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 3.1
53
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
54
Agency: Asheville Police Department
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-02
Project Title: Asheville Buncombe DWI Task Force
Project Description: This is the third year of a continuation project with the Asheville Police
Department for a DWI Task Force. Buncombe County is ranked 21st for
alcohol-related fatalities. The Driving While Impaired Task Force consists
of six officers from two different agencies, Asheville Police Department
and Buncombe County Sheriff Office. The goal of the Buncombe County
DWI Task force is to reduce the number of alcohol related fatalities and
serious injuries. The Task Force continues to work during the peak night
time hours and on weekends when impaired drivers are most prevalent.
The Task Force works closely with the local MADD chapter to educate the
citizens of Buncombe County about the dangers of drinking and driving.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 2.5
Agency: Department of Health & Human Services - Forensic Tests for Alcohol
Branch
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-03
Project Title: Breath Alcohol Testing Mobile Unit Program
Project Description: This is an ongoing project with North Carolina Department of Human
Services/Forensic Tests for Alcohol Branch for the Blood Alcohol Testing
(BAT) program. This program provides the BAT Mobile Units stationed
regionally across the state. The FTA will complete the purchasing process
for four newer BAT units this year. These units were initially ordered in
FY15 and are included in the FY16 project in the event the final delivery is
delayed. This project also includes the salary for three existing BAT
coordinators. This project will enhance their ability to assist law
enforcement agencies across the state in their efforts to remove
impaired drivers from the highways by conducting checkpoints upon
request from law enforcement agencies.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1
Agency: Department of Public Safety - State Highway Patrol
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-05
Project Title: "Booze It & Lose It" Enforcement
Project Description: This is the third year of a project with the State Highway Patrol (SHP) for
overtime enforcement of driving while impaired offenses. The goal of the
project is to reduce the number of alcohol-related fatalities and serious
injuries. The SHP will accomplish this by strategically placing Troopers in
the top 10 counties for impaired driving fatalities during the “Booze It
and Lose It” sponsored campaigns. Targeted impaired driving
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
enforcement efforts will occur during the peak night time hours and on
the weekends.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 2.5
Agency: Kernersville Police Department
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-06
Project Title: Forsyth County DWI Task Force Expansion
Project Description: This is the first year of a project to expand the Forsyth County DWI Task
Force by adding an additional traffic officer to the Kernersville Police
Department. Forsyth County ranks 6th in alcohol-related fatalities and
6th in alcohol-related injuries for the period 2009-2013. Due to the
increase in population within the service area, the number of motorists
traveling on roads in Forsyth County has increased, including a significant
rise in the number of impaired drivers. These rankings offer insight into
the prevalence of impaired drivers in Forsyth County and the safety risk
they pose. In an effort to protect motorists and pedestrians, this project
funds an additional officer to enhance participation in the existing
Forsyth County DWI Task Force, a multi-agency task force between the
police departments of Kernersville and Winston-Salem and the Forsyth
County Sheriff’s Office. An additional officer serving on this task force
will augment current efforts in reducing the number of impaired drivers
and both the traffic crashes and fatalities which they cause.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 2.5
Agency: Wilmington Police Department
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-07
Project Title: Regional Laboratory Expansion
Project Description: This is the third year of project with the Wilmington Police Department
for blood alcohol analysis. New Hanover County is ranked 24th for
alcohol-related fatalities. The North Carolina State Bureau of
Investigation laboratory does the blood alcohol testing for the majority of
law enforcement agencies in our state. Because of a recent court
decision that requires the right to confront your accuser, the length
between when a blood analysis is submitted to the time it takes for the
technician to testify in court is up to 18 months. Valuable time is being
spent traveling between counties statewide to testify on the analysis
procedures and the results. Currently, the Wilmington blood laboratory
has a turnaround time of less than 10 days for the blood alcohol testing
results. The Wilmington Police Blood Laboratory expanded the blood
alcohol testing to the Tri-County region and now provides analysis for
several counties. The expanded laboratory increased the local and state
agencies served from16 to 34 agencies covering the counties of New
Hanover, Brunswick and Pender. The Wilmington Blood Lab intends to
55
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
56
expand blood analysis services even further into Duplin, Onslow and
Cumberland counties.
CMTW: NA
Agency: Union County Sheriff's Office
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-08
Project Title: Union County DWI Task Force
Project Description: This is the initial year of a project with the Union County Sheriff's Office
for a DWI Task Force. Union County is ranked 16th for alcohol-related
fatalities. This project will fund four deputies, one sergeant and their
equipment. The project will focus on impaired drivers during the night
time hours and on the weekends. The project will also focus on the young
drivers and conduct presentations at the local high schools about the
dangers of drinking and driving. The Task Force will coordinate their
efforts with the Union County Traffic Safety Task Force to hold impaired
driving checking stations and saturation patrols on selected weekend
nights.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 2.5
Agency: Wayne County Sheriff's Office
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-09
Project Title: Wayne County DWI Task Force
Project Description: This is a first year project for a DWI Task Force in Wayne County
consisting of four deputies to address the impaired driving problem.
Wayne County is ranked 12th in overall fatalities, 14th in alcohol-related
fatalities and 19th in young-driver fatalities. Wayne County is the home
to Seymour Johnson Air Force Base resulting in a large population of
younger drivers therefore special enforcement and education efforts are
aimed at the 18 - 25 age group .
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 2.5
Agency: Department of Public Safety - State Highway Patrol
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-10
Project Title: DWI Task Force
Project Description: This is the second year of a project with the State Highway Patrol for a
DWI Task Force. The DWI Task Force is assigned to three counties. The
counties and their alcohol-related fatality rankings are: Columbus 14th,
Cumberland 3rd and Robeson 4th. The project funds seven Troopers and
one Sergeant. The goal of the North Carolina Highway Patrol is to reduce
the number of alcohol-related fatalities and serious injuries in the target
counties. The Task Force will accomplish this by focusing on driving while
impaired during the peak night time hours and on the weekends.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 2.5
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
Agency: Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-11
Project Title: DWI Task Force
Project Description: This is the third year of a continuation project with the Charlotte-
Mecklenburg Police Department for a DWI Task Force. Mecklenburg
County is ranked 2nd for alcohol-related fatalities. The Task Force
consists of seven officers with the goal to reduce the number of alcohol-related
fatalities and serious injuries. They will accomplish this by
focusing on impaired driving during the peak night time hours and on the
weekends. The Task Force will educate teen drivers about the dangers of
drinking and driving by working closely with the Carolinas Health Care
safe teen driving project.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 2.1, 2.2, 2.5
Agency: Pitt County
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-12
Project Title: Pitt County Impaired Driving Laboratory Analysis Program
Project Description: This is the third year of a project for blood alcohol analysis with the Pitt
County Sheriff's Office. The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation
laboratory does the blood alcohol testing for the majority of law
enforcement agencies in our state. Because of a recent court decision
that requires the right to confront your accuser, the length between
when a blood analysis is submitted to the time it takes for the technician
to testify in court is up to 18 months. Valuable time is being spent
traveling between counties statewide to testify on the analysis
procedures and the results. The goal of the project is to provide a blood
alcohol testing facility for Pitt County. This lab will expedite the
adjudication process by offering the court system the immediate
availability of the lab technician that performed the blood testing.
CMTW: NA
Agency: Judicial Department - Administrative Office of the Courts
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-14
Project Title: Buncombe County DWI Treatment & Prevention Court
Project Description: This is an ongoing project with the Buncombe County Administrative
Office of the Courts. Buncombe County is ranked 21st overall for alcohol-related
fatalities. Buncombe County is the 7th most populated County in
North Carolina; however the county has a higher conviction rate for
habitual DWI offenders in comparison with other counties which have a
larger population. Buncombe County is aggressively targeting repeat
offenders with a DWI Treatment Court, which follows in similar fashion,
their Drug Treatment Court. Part of the overall process is to identify
57
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Alcohol-Impaired Driving
58
Level 1 and 2 offenders and facilitate entry into the program. This project
funds a Legal Assistant to work in conjunction with the Buncombe County
DWI Treatment Court Coordinator. This is a companion project with
154AL-16-12-24.
CMTW: Chapter 1, Section 3.1
Agency: Raleigh Police Department
Project Number: 154AL-16-12-15
Project Title: Raleigh Police Department DWI Squad
Project Description: This is the third year of a project for a five officer DWI Squad. The DWI
Squad is deployed during the peak night time and weekend hours when
impaired drivers are known to be on the road. In conjunction with DWI
enforcement, the officers will also target unrestrained occupants since
the fatality rate of unrestrained occupants is higher during the night time
hours. Along with enforcement efforts, informational presentations are
planned for Driver's Education classes. The unit aims to reduce the
number of impairment-related fatalities within the city limits by 10%
from the 2012-2014 average of 37 to 33 by the end of 2016.

Cover photo: Downtown Asheville, North Carolina at night
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PAT MCCRORY ANTHONY J. TATA
GoVERNOR SECRETARY
June 30, 2015
Dr. Elizabeth A. Baker, Regional Administrator
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
10 S. Howard Street, Suite 6700
Baltimore, Maryland 21201
Dear Dr. Baker:
Enclosed you will find North Carolina's FY 2016 Highway Safety Plan (HSP) and Section 405 Applications for
your review and consideration.
The HSP outlines specific expenditures of funds for FY 2016 and includes brief descriptions of project
contracts that the Governor's Highway Safety Program (GHSP) intends to fund. The project contracts
included in the Plan were selected for funding based on the probability that each would provide a positive
impact on the goals outlined in the HSP.
We are submitting Section 405 Applications outlining how North Carolina qualifies for funding under
Sections 405B Occupant Protection, 405C State Traffic Safety Information System Improvements, 405D
Impaired Driving Countermeasures, 405E Distracted Driving, 405F Motorcyclist Safety, and 405G State
Graduated Driver Licensing.
Included in the Plan are the necessary certifications and the listing of all equipment costing $5,000 or more
for your review.
Additionally, the North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program formally requests a NHTSA Occupant
Protection assessment for FY2016. G HSP will fund the assessment and act as the lead agency for planning
and directing the assessment.
North Carolina anticipates a favorable review of all sections applied for in the Highway Safety Plan and
Section 405 applications. If there are any questions or clarifications needed, please contact me at 919-733-
3083.
?J~'
Don Nail
;[q
Director, G R
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 919-733-3083 LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: 919-733-0604 215 EAST LANE STREET
GOVERNOR'S HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAM RALEIGH NC
1508 MAIL SERVICE CENTER W'VVW.NCDOT. ORGIPROGRAMSIGHSP!
RALEIGH NC 27699-1508
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1
Overview of North Carolina’s Governor’s Highway Safety Program .............................................. 5
History ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Organizational Structure ............................................................................................................. 5
North Carolina Demographics ........................................................................................................ 7
Population .................................................................................................................................. 7
Geography .................................................................................................................................. 8
Transportation ............................................................................................................................ 9
Media in North Carolina.............................................................................................................. 9
Project Selection Process .............................................................................................................. 11
Traffic Safety Project Proposals ................................................................................................ 11
Planning Process ....................................................................................................................... 12
Problem Identification & Target Setting Process .......................................................................... 15
Problem Identification .............................................................................................................. 15
NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan ............................................................................................. 15
Sources of Information ............................................................................................................. 16
Target Setting Process .............................................................................................................. 18
Performance Measures & Targets ................................................................................................ 21
Performance Measures ............................................................................................................. 21
National Comparisons ............................................................................................................... 28
County Comparisons ................................................................................................................. 29
Program Targets ........................................................................................................................ 32
Alignment of Targets with the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan ........................................... 33
Program Areas and Selection of Evidence-Based Countermeasures ........................................... 37
Data-driven Problem Identification .......................................................................................... 37
Selection of Evidence-based Countermeasures ....................................................................... 38
Continuous Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 38
Program Areas .......................................................................................................................... 38
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
ii
Funded Projects And Activities ................................................................................................. 39
Alcohol-Impaired Driving .............................................................................................................. 41
Target ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Evidence Considered ................................................................................................................. 41
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................... 48
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 49
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ................................................................................. 50
Media Plan ............................................................................................................................... 52
FY2016 Alcohol-Impaired Driving Projects ............................................................................... 53
Occupant Protection ..................................................................................................................... 67
Targets ..................................................................................................................................... 67
Evidence Considered ................................................................................................................. 67
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................... 76
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 80
Countermeasures & Funding Priorities..................................................................................... 81
Media Plan ............................................................................................................................... 82
FY2016 Occupant Protection Projects ...................................................................................... 83
Police Traffic Services.................................................................................................................... 89
Target ....................................................................................................................................... 89
Evidence Considered ................................................................................................................. 89
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................... 94
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 94
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ................................................................................. 95
Media Plan ............................................................................................................................... 95
FY2016 Police Traffic Services Projects ..................................................................................... 95
Young Drivers .............................................................................................................................. 105
Target ..................................................................................................................................... 105
Evidence Considered ............................................................................................................... 105
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................. 109
Summary ................................................................................................................................ 110
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ............................................................................... 110
Media Plan .............................................................................................................................. 111
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
iii
FY2016 Young Driver Projects ................................................................................................. 111
Motorcycle Safety ....................................................................................................................... 115
Target ..................................................................................................................................... 115
Evidence Considered ............................................................................................................... 115
Statewide Campaigns/Programs............................................................................................. 120
Summary ................................................................................................................................ 121
Countermeasures And Funding Priorities ............................................................................... 121
Media Plan .............................................................................................................................. 122
FY2016 Motorcycle Safety Projects ........................................................................................ 122
Traffic Records ............................................................................................................................ 127
Target ..................................................................................................................................... 127
Nc Traffic Records Coordinating Committee (NC TRCC) ......................................................... 127
NC Traffic Records Assessment ............................................................................................... 128
NC Traffic Records Strategic Planning..................................................................................... 129
NC TRCC Current Activities ..................................................................................................... 129
Newly Defined Goals Of The NC TRCC .................................................................................... 130
NC TRCC Meeting Schedule .................................................................................................... 131
FY2016 Traffic Records Projects ............................................................................................. 132
Other Highway Safety Priorities .................................................................................................. 135
Targets ................................................................................................................................... 135
Older Drivers ........................................................................................................................... 135
Pedestrians .............................................................................................................................. 140
Bicyclists ................................................................................................................................. 144
Distracted Driving ................................................................................................................... 147
FY2016 Other Highway Safety Priorities Projects ................................................................... 149
NC Highway Safety Media Plan ................................................................................................... 151
Priority Areas .......................................................................................................................... 151
FY2016 Media Projects ........................................................................................................... 152
Equipment Requests of $5,000 or More .................................................................................... 155
Cost Summary ............................................................................................................................. 157
Certifications and Assurances ..................................................................................................... 163
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Table of Contents
iv
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
1
Executive Summary
Fellow North Carolinians,
On behalf of the Governor McCrory Administration, I am pleased to submit this Highway Safety
Plan for fiscal year 2016. Each year, the North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
(GHSP) prepares a Highway Safety Plan as a guide for our State’s federally funded traffic safety
activities. GHSP strives to ensure that funding is allocated to those projects and programs that
can provide the greatest impact on reducing motor vehicle crashes, injuries and fatalities in
North Carolina.
During 2013, there were 1,289 fatalities resulting from motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina
– a slight (0.8%) decrease from the 1,299 fatalities in 2012. As with fatalities, the number of
disabling (A) injuries decreased in 2013. It is encouraging that the number of fatalities and
disabling injuries both decreased from 2012 to 2013. In addition to decreases in fatalities and
disabling injuries, the fatality rate per vehicle mile traveled (VMT) also decreased slightly from
1.24 in 2012 to 1.23 in 2013. Traffic fatalities, serious injuries, and fatalities per VMT remain
near historic lows. Nonetheless, recent trends in fatalities and injuries remind us how important
it is for GHSP to remain committed to funding proven programs and countermeasures to
reduce motor vehicle fatalities in North Carolina.
In addition to fatality counts, fatalities per VMT, and disabling (A) injuries all decreasing, a
number of other traffic safety indicators showed improvement during 2013 including:
 Speed-related fatalities decreased from 441 to 413.
 The number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes decreased from 170
to 153.
 The number of pedestrians killed in crashes dropped from 200 to 173.
 The number of pedalcyclists killed in crashes dropped from 27 to 22.
These decreases are likely due to a variety of factors including ongoing high visibility
enforcement and education efforts, a changing population, and economic factors that influence
driving. As part of the FY2016 Performance Plan, we have set goals to further reduce fatalities
and serious injuries in North Carolina by the year 2016.
Other performance measures showed little change during 2013, or changed in the wrong
direction. The number of fatalities involving drivers or motorcycle operators with a BAC of .08
or greater only dropped by one fatality, from 372 to 371. GHSP is not satisfied with maintaining
the status quo and remains committed to removing impaired drivers from our roadways. GHSP
is funding a number of initiatives during FY2016 to address impaired driving. North Carolina has
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
2
a Statewide Impaired Driving Task Force that created an Impaired Driving Plan that provides a
comprehensive strategy for preventing and reducing alcohol-impaired driving in North Carolina.
Another area of continuing concern is motorcycle rider fatalities. During 2013, motorcycle
fatalities fell slightly from 198 to 189, but motorcyclists now account for 15% of traffic fatalities
in North Carolina – twice the level of 10 years ago (7.3%). One positive finding is the vast
majority of fatally injured motorcyclists in North Carolina were wearing a helmet when they
crashed. In all likelihood, North Carolina would have experienced many more fatalities if the
state did not have a universal helmet law and a high rate of helmet use. To address the growing
problem of motorcycle rider fatalities, GHSP has expanded the “BikeSafe NC” program with a
system of regional coordinators.
Pedestrian fatalities decreased to 173 in 2013 from 200 in 2012. Although crashes involving
pedestrians represent only about 1% of the total reported crashes in North Carolina but
accounted for 14% of all traffic fatalities during the last three years. This shows us that
pedestrians are highly over-represented in fatal crashes. GHSP continues to consider new
approaches to address this growing problem.
The observed belt use rate for drivers and front seat occupants in 2013 was 88.6%, up slightly
from 87.5% in 2012. The most recent observational survey (conducted in June 2014) found the
observed belt use rate had finally surpassed 90% (at 90.6%). Even though seat belt use is now
over 90%, GHSP will continue to support proven countermeasures to increase seat belt use
including high visibility enforcement targeting nighttime belt use and focusing on those
counties with the highest numbers of unrestrained fatalities.
During FY2016, GHSP will fund a variety of programs, projects and activities with federal
transportation funds, which are intended to advance the traffic safety targets set forth in this
Highway Safety Plan. The North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program has identified the
following areas as top priorities for program funding for FY2016:
 Alcohol-Impaired Driving (accounting for 371 fatalities in 2013)
 Occupant Protection (355 unrestrained fatalities)
 Speeding and Police Traffic Services (413 fatalities)
 Young Drivers (153 fatalities)
 Motorcycles (189 fatalities)
 Traffic Records
 Other Highway Safety Priorities: Older Drivers (218 fatalities); Pedestrians (173
fatalities); Bicyclists (22 fatalities); Distracted Driving (126 fatal crashes)
The North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program also requests a NHTSA Assessment for
Occupant Protection for FY2016. GHSP will allocate funding to conduct the Assessment and will
serve as the lead agency on the Assessment.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
3
This document describes the organizational structure of the Governor’s Highway Safety
Program, the problem identification process employed to determine the priority areas and
accompanying goals for FY2016, and the process to select sub-grantees for FY2016. It also
includes the performance measures and targets for the core outcome and behavior measures
as required by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Governor’s
Highway Safety Association (GHSA). In accordance with MAP-21 requirements for FY 2016, the
targets of this FY2015 GHSP Highway Safety Plan are aligned with the goals of the North
Carolina Strategic Highway Safety Plan, which was most recently revised during 2014 and
released, in its final version, in March 2015. Finally, the HSP document includes the reqired
Certifications and Assurances and Cost Summary.
GHSP is committed to reducing motor vehicle crashes and fatalities in North Carolina. We thank
our partners and federal counterparts for their continued support and dedication to highway
safety, and we look forward to having another productive and successful year.
Don Nail, Director
North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Executive Summary
4
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC GHSP Overview
5
Overview of North Carolina’s
Governor’s Highway Safety Program
HISTORY
When Congress passed the Highway Safety Act of 1966, the Act provided that:
 Each state shall have a highway safety program – approved by the US Secretary of
Transportation – designed to reduce traffic crashes, and the resulting deaths, injuries
and property damage.
 Each state's program shall be in accordance with
highway safety standards promulgated by the US
Secretary of Transportation.
 At least 40 percent of the federal funds apportioned
to the state must be expended to benefit local
highway safety activities.
 The Governor shall be responsible for the
administration of the program through a state agency,
which has adequate powers and is suitably equipped
and organized to carry out the program.
In 1967, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted
legislation which empowered the Governor to contract with
the US Department of Transportation for the purpose of
securing funding available through the Highway Safety Act of 1966, Section 402. The Governor
then delegated this responsibility to the Director of the Governor's Highway Safety Program
(GHSP), who also held the title of the Governor’s Representative for Highway Safety. In 1975,
the General Assembly gave the responsibility for the Highway Safety Program to the Secretary
of Transportation.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
GHSP employees are subject to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT)
personnel policies and the State Personnel Act. The Governor of North Carolina appoints the
Director of the Governor's Highway Safety Program as the official responsible for all aspects of
the highway safety program. The Director is the ranking official having authority to administer
the highway safety program.
GHSP is currently staffed with ten professionals and three support personnel. The Director
delegates the day-to-day office operations and functions of the agency to the Assistant
GHSP’s Mission
The mission of the
Governor’s Highway
Safety Program is to
promote highway safety
awareness and reduce
the number of traffic
crashes and fatalities in
the state of North
Carolina through the
planning and execution of
safety programs.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC GHSP Overview
6
Director. The Assistant Director directly oversees and/or influences GHSP’s three primary
sections:
1. Planning, Programs and Evaluation Section
The function of the Planning, Programs and Evaluation section is to develop, implement,
manage, monitor and evaluate a grants program that effectively addresses highway safety
concerns identified as a result of a comprehensive analysis of crash, citation and other empirical
data. This program is the basis for the annual Highway Safety Plan. The Planning, Programs and
Evaluation section is currently staffed with five Highway Safety Specialists. One additional
specialist coordinates and oversees the law enforcement liaison system. Every project is
assigned to a specific Highway Safety Specialist. The Highway Safety Specialist is the Project
Director’s liaison with GHSP, NHTSA and other highway safety agencies.
2. Finance and Administration Section
The function of the Finance and Administration section is to manage and coordinate the
financial operations and administrative support needs of GHSP. The Finance and Administration
section is currently staffed with a Finance Officer, administrative assistant, office administrator
and a materials and points system administrator.
3. Public Information and Education
The function of the Public Information and Education section is to increase the level of
awareness and visibility of highway safety issues and the visibility of GHSP. The Public
Information and Education section is staffed internally by a Public Information Officer.
Additionally, GHSP has the assistance of a Highway Safety Marketing Specialist who works
under the direction of the NC Department of Transportation’s Communications Office with
input from GHSP.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
7
North Carolina Demographics
POPULATION
North Carolina is the 10th largest state in the U.S. The population was an estimated 9,943,964
in 2014 according to the U.S. Census Bureau. North Carolina is growing rapidly – the state’s
population has increased 4.3% since 2010 and 24% since 2000. North Carolina’s 10 largest cities
include Charlotte (809,958), Raleigh (439,896), Greensboro (282,586), Durham (251,893),
Winston-Salem (239,269), Fayetteville (203,948), Cary (155,227), Wilmington (113,657), High
Point (108,629), and Greenville (84,976).
The median age in North Carolina is 37.4 years. Thirteen percent (13%) of the state’s population
is age 65 or older; 24% is under age 18. The population is predominantly white (69%) and
Black/African American (22%). Nine percent (9%) is Latino. The median income in North
Carolina is $46,450.
North Carolina is comprised of 100 counties. About two-thirds (65) of these counties have
experienced population growth since 2010. The table below shows the 10 fastest growing
counties in North Carolina. Many of these counties are in the lower coastal plain and the urban
areas of the Piedmont. Meanwhile, 33 of North Carolina’s 100 counties have experienced
population decline since 2010 including Tyrrell (-5.9%), Washington (-3.7%), Northampton (-
3.6%), Martin (-3.0%), Bertie (-2.9%), Halifax (-2.5%), Pasquotank (-2.4%), Richmond (-2.3%),
Edgecombe (-2.1%), and Warren (-1.9%). Several of these counties are located in the
northeastern part of the state.
Fastest Growing Counties in North Carolina, 2010-2014
County
2010
Population
2014
Population
Growth % Change
Mecklenburg 923,417 1,013,290 89,873 9.7%
Brunswick 108,085 117,852 9,767 9.0%
Wake 906,910 985,320 78,410 8.6%
Harnett 115,724 125,717 9,993 8.6%
Pender 52,409 56,540 4,131 7.9%
Chatham 63,786 68,726 4,940 7.7%
Durham 271,303 292,194 20,891 7.7%
Hoke 47,570 50,987 3,417 7.2%
Cabarrus 178,690 191,080 12,390 6.9%
Union 202,171 215,956 13,785 6.8%
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
8
GEOGRAPHY
North Carolina is
located in the
southeastern United
States and borders four
states: Virginia,
Tennessee, Georgia and
South Carolina. In
terms of land area,
North Carolina is the
28th largest state with
53,819 square miles.
There are three distinct
geographic regions in
North Carolina – the
Coastal plain, Mountain
region, and Piedmont.
The Coastal plain occupies the eastern part of the state and is a popular tourist destination.
Besides its many beaches, the Coastal plain features the Outer Banks, Kill Devil Hills (the site of
the Wright Brothers’
first powered flight), a
shipwreck museum and
lighthouses. The
Mountain region is
located in the western
part of the state and
includes hundreds of
miles of hiking trails,
including the
Appalachian Trail. The
highest elevation is Mt.
Mitchell at 6,684 feet –
the highest peak east of
the Mississippi River. In
between the Coastal
and Mountain regions lies the Piedmont, which is the state’s most urbanized and densely
populated region. North Carolina’s capital (Raleigh) and largest city (Charlotte) are both in the
Piedmont.
Charlotte skyline
Blue Ridge Mountains
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
9
TRANSPORTATION
North Carolina has the second largest state highway system in the country. The transportation
system includes 105,063 miles of roadway, 1,254 miles of interstate highways and 69,450 miles
of rural roads. According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), North Carolina had
6,822,902 licensed drivers in 2013, an increase of 2% from 2012. Eighty-six percent (86%) of the
driving-age population in the state is licensed. FHWA records indicate a total of 7,813,854
registered vehicles in 2013, of which 3,462,557 were privately owned automobiles and 195,479
were privately owned motorcycles.
Multiple vehicle ownership is common in North Carolina. According to the U.S. Census, 77% of
North Carolina residents report having access to two or more vehicles. Twenty-one percent
(21%) say they have access to only one vehicle, while 3% say they have access to no vehicles.
Among employed adults in North Carolina, the vast majority drive to work alone (81%). Eleven
percent (11%) report carpooling to work, while only a small percent take public transportation
(1.1%), walk (1.8%), or bike (0.2%). Almost two-thirds (72%) work in the same county in which
they live; 25% work in another county, and 3% work in another state. The mean time to travel
to work is 23.5 minutes (U.S. Census, 2012).
MEDIA IN NORTH CAROLINA
North Carolina has a large number of media outlets including 153 newspapers, 40 television
stations, and 71 radio stations. The state also has several major business journals, magazines,
college newspapers, and a North Carolina news network.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
NC Demographics
10
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
11
Project Selection Process
TRAFFIC SAFETY PROJECT PROPOSALS
Each year, GHSP provides funds for projects that are designed to reduce crashes, injuries and
fatalities in North Carolina. GHSP uses a web-based application system to streamline the
process for organizations, municipalities and state agencies who apply for highway safety
grants. The system is integrated with NCDOT’s Federal Aid, Grants and Financial System and
allows users to view the status of an application and make changes to a contract at any time. In
addition to reducing paperwork, GHSP staff can approve applications electronically. Proper
authorization is necessary to access the system.
Some general guidelines about GHSP highway safety grants program:
 All funding from GHSP must be for highway safety purposes only.
 All funding must be necessary and reasonable.
 All funding is based on the implementation of evidence-based strategies
 All funding is performance-based. Substantial progress in reducing crashes, injuries and
fatalities is required as a condition of continued funding.
 All funding is passed through from the Federal government and is subject to both
federal and state regulations.
 All funding is considered to be “seed money” to get programs started. In most cases the
grantee is expected to provide a portion of the project costs and is expected to continue
the program after GHSP funding ends.
 Projects are only approved for one full or partial federal fiscal year at a time. However,
projects are typically funded for up to three consecutive years.
 Funding cannot be used to replace or supplant existing expenditures, nor can they be
used to carry out the general operating expenses of the grantee.
 All funding is on a reimbursement basis. The grantee must pay for all expenses up front
and then submit a reimbursement request to receive the funds.
 Special provisions for law enforcement agencies include:
o Must conduct a minimum of one day-time and one night-time seat belt initiative
per month and one impaired driving checkpoint per month; and
o Must participate in all "Click It or Ticket" and "Booze It & Lose It" campaigns.
All traffic safety project proposals are due to GHSP by January 31st of each year. GHSP utilizes
an in-house review team to select the best project applications. GHSP Highway Safety
Specialists (HSSs) conduct the initial review of projects based on the applicants’ problem
identification, goals and objectives, use of evidence-based strategies and activities, budget, and
past performance. Specialists also consider whether the application is within the top 25 target
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
12
counties. GHSP then has a review meeting that includes all
GHSP HSSs, the Director, Assistant Director, Law Enforcement
Liaison, and Finance Officer.
GHSP relies heavily on the HSS review of the application, the
summary documentation provided by the HSS, and the actual
review conducted in the group setting. All applications are
projected individually via an overhead projection system to
allow the entire review team to critique the individual
applications, provide input, and ask questions concerning the
individual proposals. GHSP also solicits input from the
Regional Law Enforcement Liaison (RLEL) network or other
partners (when appropriate) as part of the decision making
process.
Risk Assessment
The review process GHSP conducts includes a risk assessment
of the agency and the proposed project. This information is
captured on the project review form initially completed by
the HSS. The risk assessment may include such information as
the past performance of the agency during previous grants
including claim and reporting timeliness and accuracy,
previous participation in GHSP sponsored campaigns and
events, tenure of agency head, agency size, agency’s current
emphasis on highway safety, agency’s highway safety
enforcement efforts for the three previous years, monitoring
results from other Federal agency awards, and any other
incidental or anecdotal information that may provide an
indication of project success or failure. Prior to funding any
project, checks of debarred lists and for known single audit
findings that may indicate a high risk are made. If a project is
funded, but deemed a higher than normal risk GHSP typically will require enhanced reporting
and/or monitoring to better track the project progress.
Once a traffic safety project proposal is approved by GHSP and NHTSA, an agreement is
electronically signed and returned to the applicant agency with an approval letter.
PLANNING PROCESS
Below is a brief overview of the planning process used to identify the projects that will have the
greatest impact in promoting highway safety awareness and reducing the number of traffic
crashes, injuries and fatalities in the state. The highway safety planning process is circular and
The Highway Safety Plan:
The Highway Safety Plan
(HSP) is a compilation of all
the approved highway
safety projects with a short
description of each project
and how they address the
identified problems. The
GHSP Planning, Programs
and Evaluation staff drafts
the HSP on the basis of the
problems identified and the
various approved projects.
The Plan is submitted to the
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration
(NHTSA) and the Federal
Highway Administration
(FHWA) for review. It is also
sent to the Governor and to
the NCDOT Secretary. Once
approved, the HSP is
implemented on October 1
and is in effect through
September 30 of the
following year. For FY2016,
the University of North
Carolina Highway Safety
Research Center assisted in
the preparation of North
Carolina’s Highway Safety
Plan.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
13
continuous. The efforts from each year influence the problem areas and performance targets
for the following year.
1. Solicit potential grantees (January)
Organizations and agencies who are interested in developing projects that address GHSP’s
identified priority program areas are encouraged to attend the one-on-one session at the
Highway Safety Symposium or review the guidelines for project proposals. They are also
encouraged to contact a Highway Safety Specialist if they have any questions. The online
information outlines the priority program areas and the type of grant activities that GHSP is
seeking for the next fiscal year. In addition, instructions and timelines for submitting an
application using the online system are available. Grantees who have received funding from
GHSP in previous fiscal years as well as potential new applicants are encouraged to review this
information.
2. Review highway safety grant applications (February – April)
As described above, the GHSP Highway Safety Specialists review projects and prioritize
applications based on the applicants’ problem identification, goals and objectives, use of
evidence-based strategies and activities, budget, and past performance. GHSP also receives
input from the Regional Law Enforcement Liaison network and other partners before final
selections are made.
3. Project agreements (May – July)
Applicants are informed about decisions on their applications. During this period, the final
Highway Safety Plan and Performance Plan are submitted to NHTSA and FHWA.
4. Monitoring and reporting (August – December)
New grants are implemented beginning October 1. GHSP monitors grantees to ensure
compliance with standards and project agreements. Throughout the year, grantees are
required to submit quarterly progress reports documenting their activities, accomplishments,
and any potential problems that may have arisen. Finally, GHSP prepares the Annual Report
which is due December 31 of each year.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Project Selection Process
14
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
15
Problem Identification & Target Setting
Process
PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
The North Carolina’s Governor’s Highway Safety Program conducts an extensive problem
identification process to develop and implement the most effective and efficient plan for the
distribution of federal funds. Problem identification is vital to the success of our highway safety
program and ensures the initiatives implemented address the crash, fatality, and injury
problems within the state. It also provides appropriate criteria for the designation of funding
priorities and provides a benchmark for administration and evaluation of the overall Highway
Safety Plan.
GHSP uses the problem identification process and guidelines outlined in the NHTSA Traffic
Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies and the GHSA Guidelines for
Developing Highway Safety Performance Plans.
NC STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN
In accordance with MAP-21 requirements, GHSP strives to assure that the targets and goals of
the NC Highway Safety Plan are aligned with the goals of the North Carolina Strategic Highway
Safety Plan (SHSP). NC’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan was initially developed in 2004 and most
recently revised in 2014 by the North Carolina Executive Committee for Highway Safety and its
partner organizations. These safety stakeholders include State, regional, local, and tribal
agencies, as well as other public and private partners.
North Carolina is a Vision Zero State—even one fatality is too many on our roadways. This Plan
articulates the way forward to achieve Vision Zero. The Plan’s vision, mission, and goals guide
the development and implementation of strategies and actions to achieve Vision Zero. The
working goal of the revised Strategic Plan is to cut fatalities and serious injuries in North
Carolina in half based on the 2013 figures, reducing the total annual fatalities by 630 fatalities
and the total serious injuries by 1,055 serious injuries before 2030.
The goals of the Plan will be achieved through the implementation of strategies and actions in
nine safety emphasis areas:
 Demographic Considerations
 Driving While Impaired
 Emerging Issues and Data
 Intersection Safety
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
16
 Keeping Drivers Alert
 Lane Departure
 Occupant Protection/Motorcycles
 Pedestrians and Bicyclists
 Speed
Emphasis area working groups (EAWGs) were convened for each focus area and were tasked
with developing a plan for each emphasis area that defines the problem, describes past and
ongoing efforts to address it, and identifies strategies and actions moving forward to further
improve safety in that area. These emphasis areas represent the greatest opportunity for the
safety stakeholders to focus their efforts to achieve the goals of the Plan. The safety
stakeholders selected these emphasis areas cooperatively through a data-driven approach,
noting that many individual crashes can be attributed to more than one emphasis area. For
example, a crash may involve speeding, intersection safety, and occupant protection.
Therefore, these emphasis areas provide an opportunity to address crashes from multiple
perspectives.
The North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program was a key player in the process of
updating the NC SHSP with Highway Safety Specialists and other GHSP staff serving on each of
the EAWGs. This participation allows GHSP to align the targets and strategies of the NC Highway
Safety Plan with the goals and strategies of the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan to the greatest
degree possible. Refer to the “Alignment of Targets with the North Carolina Strategic Highway
Safety Plan” section in the “Performance Measures & Targets” chapter for additional
information.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
A number of data sources are examined to give the most complete picture of the major traffic
safety problems in the state. The sources of information that informed our problem
identification process for FY2016 are described below.
Traffic Crash Data
North Carolina is fortunate to have a centralized source for all traffic data. This data is collected
from the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) as well as from other Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) staff members throughout the state. This data is channeled to the State Traffic Safety
Engineer within NCDOT and is readily available to GHSP and, on a more limited basis, the public.
In addition to the crash data, GHSP has access to North Carolina licensure data (state-wide and
by county), registered vehicle data (state-wide and by county), and vehicle miles traveled data.
Additionally, GHSP has access to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality
Analysis Reporting System (FARS) which is the primary tool for comparing NC data to the
national numbers to identify our state’s ongoing concerns. GHSP compares current year crash
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
17
data with crash data from the previous 5-10 years. This data is critical to monitoring trends and
establishing appropriate targets. The FY2016 Highway Safety Plan includes FARS data and North
Carolina crash data through 2013 – the most recent years available at the time this HSP was
prepared.
Crash data are critical for evaluating the effectiveness of highway safety initiatives and
establishing targets for future years. Within the crash data, each of the following variables were
examined as part of the problem identification process: crash severity (fatal, injury or property
damage only), driver age, driver gender, time of day of the crash, vehicle type, and whether the
crash occurred on an urban or rural road. Crash data were also examined for each of North
Carolina’s 100 counties. The county-specific data were used to rank the counties in terms of
their relative contributions to specific traffic safety problems in North Carolina such as alcohol-impaired
driving, seat belt non-use, and speeding.
Enforcement and Adjudication Data
GHSP conducts highway safety campaigns throughout the year. Law enforcement agencies are
asked to report their citation totals weekly from activities conducted during each campaign
week. GHSP campaigns and reporting deadlines are listed on the GHSP Yearly Planning
Calendar. Law enforcement agencies are also asked to report their year-round traffic safety
activities such as seat belt enforcement initiatives, DWI checking stations, and saturation
patrols. These special enforcement data reports for GHSP campaigns and events are submitted
to GHSP through an on-line reporting system.
North Carolina also has a centralized system of courts administered by the Administrative
Office of Courts (AOC). This enables GHSP to obtain accurate and up to date data on citations
including the status and disposition of cases.
Census Data (State-Wide and by County)
The State Demographics branch of the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management
(OSBM) is responsible for producing annual population estimates and projections of the
population of North Carolina’s counties and municipalities that are used in the distribution of
state shared revenues to local governments. County population projections, available by age,
race (white/other) and sex, are used for long range planning on the county level for traffic
safety problems in the state.
Seat Belt Use Observational Survey
North Carolina’s annual seat belt use survey is conducted each year in June. The last survey for
which data is available was conducted in June, 2014 in 15 counties across the state. Trained
observers recorded information from stopped or nearly stopped vehicles. Data were collected
during rush hours (weekdays between 7am and 9am or 3:30pm and 6pm), non-rush hours
(weekdays between 9am and 3:30pm), and on weekends (Saturday or Sunday between 7am
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
18
and 6pm). Data from the annual seat belt use survey is used to track how belt use has changed
over time, and to identify high-risk populations for seat belt non-use.
Consultation with Other Organizations
GHSP collaborates with many organizations as part of the problem identification process
including the Division of Motor Vehicles, the Traffic Safety Systems Management Unit of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the University of North Carolina Highway
Safety Research Center. The information provided by these agencies is supplemented by data
from other state and local agencies. Federal mandates and the nine national priority program
emphasis areas also influence problem identification.
In summary, GHSP, works in conjunction with a team of partner agencies and uses a variety of
data sources to identify specific traffic safety problems facing North Carolina. Based on this
information, specific targets are established addressing each problem area. The target setting
process is described below.
TARGET SETTING PROCESS
Many factors were considered when setting performance targets for FY2016. The overall
objective was to set performance targets that were challenging, but obtainable. The ultimate
goal is zero deaths from motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina. The factors considered in the
goal setting process included the following:
 Trends in crashes and fatalities: As mentioned above, trends in crashes and fatalities in
North Carolina were examined for the previous 5-10 years. For example, motor vehicle
fatalities have decreased from 1,676 during 2007, to 1,289 during 2013. The fatality rate
per 100 million vehicle miles traveled also decreased from 1.62 to 1.23 between 2007
and 2013. During that same period, reductions have also been achieved in the number
of fatalities involving a driver with a BAC of .08 or above, unrestrained passenger vehicle
occupant fatalities, young driver fatalities, motorcyclist fatalities, and speed-related
fatalities. A primary objective is to build upon this success by setting ambitious, but
achievable targets for further reductions in fatalities.
 Ceiling/floor effects: As crashes or fatalities become rarer, progress becomes
increasingly difficult to achieve. For example, North Carolina has averaged about 15
unhelmeted motorcycle fatalities each year during the past 7 years. This rate is very low,
and would be difficult to improve upon. Rather than spending funds to reduce this rate
even further, resources might be better spent on other problem areas where greater
progress can be achieved.
 The effect of external forces: The extent to which crashes or fatalities may be a function
of external forces or factors beyond the ability of law enforcement, safety advocates,
educators and others to influence was also considered. These may include economic
factors, gasoline prices, changes to the population, geographic, topographic and
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
19
roadway system factors. For example, North Carolina’s population has steadily
increased during the past decade. The larger population – along with the resulting
increase in licensed drivers and registered vehicles – elevate the potential for crashes
and fatalities to occur. However, other factors such as a slow economy and high gas
prices may serve to dampen this effect. To the extent possible, we considered the
potential effect of these external forces in setting targets.
 Effectiveness of known countermeasures: Another factor considered when setting
targets was whether there are known effective programs/approaches to address the
particular problem area. This includes how many effective countermeasures are
available and how powerful they are. With some problem areas, such as alcohol-impaired
driving, there are a number of proven countermeasures for reducing crashes
and fatalities. For example, high-visibility sobriety checkpoints receive a maximum rating
of 5-stars for effectiveness in NHTSA’s Countermeasures that Work. Hence, we set fairly
challenging, but achievable targets for this problem area. With regard to young drivers,
there is only one proven countermeasure – graduated driver licensing (GDL). North
Carolina is fortunate to have an excellent GDL system in place. However, achieving
further reductions in young driver crashes may be challenging given the lack of other
proven programs currently available. There are several young driver initiatives
underway in North Carolina such as the StreetSafe program, VIP for a VIP, and Time to
Drive. Evaluations of some of these programs are currently underway, but have not yet
been completed, so their effectiveness is unknown. The targets for reducing young
driver crashes are therefore somewhat less ambitious than for alcohol-impaired driving.
The FY2016 Highway Safety Plan targets were established after considering the above factors.
The specific performance measures and targets for North Carolina are described in the next
section.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Problem ID & Target Setting
20
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
21
Performance Measures & Targets
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
North Carolina’s 17 key traffic safety indicators are shown beginning on page 26. During 2013,
there were 1,289 fatalities resulting from motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina – a slight
(0.8%) decrease from the 1,299 fatalities in 2012. The increase seen between 2011 and 2012
likely reflected improving economic conditions in North Carolina and greater travel during that
time. The decrease in overall fatalities between 2012 and 2013 reflects that there has been a
gradual downward trend in motor vehicle fatalities in North Carolina over the past decade, as
shown in the figure below.
Source: FARS 2004 – 2013
Traffic fatalities in North Carolina remain near historic lows. Nonetheless, the rise in fatalities
from 2011 to 2012 was concerning and reminds us how important it is for GHSP to remain
committed to funding proven programs and countermeasures to reduce motor vehicle fatalities
in North Carolina.
As shown in the following figure, the number of disabling (A) injuries decreased in 2013,
continuing a long-standing downward trend. It is encouraging that the number of fatalities and
disabling injuries both decreased in 2013.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
22
Source: NC DOT Motor Vehicle Crash Data: 2004 – 2013
In addition to decreases in fatalities and disabling injuries, the fatality rate per vehicle mile
traveled (VMT) also decreased slightly in 2013 after increasing in 2012. There were 1.23
fatalities per 100 million VMT during 2013, compared to 1.24 in 2012 and 1.19 during 2011.
Once again, the long-term trend suggests a decrease in fatalities per VMT, as shown below.
Source: FARS 2004 – 2013
As mentioned earlier in the “State Demographics” section, North Carolina’s population has
grown considerably during the last decade. Consequently, it is important to consider fatality
rates per capita. The figure below shows fatality rates per 100,000 population in North Carolina
from 2004 through 2013. Similar to the previous analyses, there was a slight decrease in the per
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
23
population rate for 2013. Again, the overall pattern suggests a steady decline in fatal crashes
per capita.
Source: FARS 2004 – 2013 and U.S. Census Bureau
During 2013, fatalities most commonly involved occupants of passenger cars (41%), followed by
pedestrians (14%), motorcyclists (12%), occupants of SUVs (12%), and pickup trucks (10%). As
shown in the figure below, motorcyclists and pedestrians have accounted for a growing share
of the fatalities in North Carolina over the past five years.
Source: NC DOT Motor Vehicle Crash Data: 2004 – 2013
Fatalities among males decreased slightly this past year, down from 927 fatalities in 2012, to
918 fatalities in 2013. Fatalities among females stayed virtually the same, from 372 to 371. Over
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
24
the past five years, about 70% of the total fatalities were males. The overall trend over the past
seven years has been a decrease in fatalities for both males and females, as shown below, but
the decline for males has been somewhat greater.
Source: FARS 2007 – 2013
Rural roadways account for approximately 70% of fatalities each year in North Carolina.
Although fatalities in rural locations have decreased over the past seven years, there was a
noticeable increase in urban fatalities during 2013, as shown in the figure below.
Source: FARS 2007 – 2013
Fatalities also vary based on time of day. As shown by the red line in figure below, the highest
percent of fatalities during 2013 was between 4:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. This coincides with the
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
25
daily “rush hour” and early evening traffic. The blue line in the figure shows the percent of
motor vehicle occupants in crashes who were killed by time of day. The percent of those in
crashes who are killed is quite low – below 1 percent. However, it can readily be seen that a
much larger proportion of drivers and occupants in crashes during the late night and early
morning are killed. The percent of drivers/occupants killed increases sharply after 7 p.m. and
reached a peak between 1:00 a.m. and 3:59 a.m. The overrepresentation of fatalities at night is
evident when considering that only 23% of crashes occur between 7:00 p.m. and 6:59 a.m., but
49% of fatalities occur during those hours. Fatigue, alcohol, and seat-belt nonuse all contribute
to the increased risk of fatal crashes at nighttime.
Source: FARS 2013
The age of persons fatally injured in motor vehicle crashes in North Carolina is shown on the
following page. During 2013, there were 50 fatalities among persons age 14 or younger, a
decrease from the 54 fatalities in this age group in 2012. Fatalities increase substantially once
teens reach driving age. During 2013, there were 78 fatalities among those ages 15 to 19, down
from 88 in 2012. Among all age groups, fatalities were highest among young adults between
the ages of 20 and 24.
As mentioned previously, fatality counts, fatalities per VMT, and disabling (A) injuries all
decreased in 2013. In addition, a number of other traffic safety indicators showed improvement
during 2013 including:
 Speed-related fatalities decreased from 441 to 413.
 The number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes decreased from 170
to 153.
 The number of pedestrians killed in crashes dropped from 200 to 173.
 The number of pedalcyclists killed in crashes dropped from 27 to 22.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
26
Source: FARS 2012 – 2013
These decreases in traffic safety indicators are likely due to a variety of factors including
ongoing high visibility enforcement and education efforts, a changing population, and economic
factors that influence driving. As part of the FY2016 Performance Plan, we have set goals to
further reduce fatalities and serious injuries in North Carolina by the year 2016.
Other performance measures showed little change during 2013, or changed in the wrong
direction. The number of fatalities involving drivers or motorcycle operators with a BAC of .08
or greater only dropped by one fatality, from 372 to 371. GHSP is not satisfied with maintaining
the status quo and remains committed to removing impaired drivers from our roadways. GHSP
is funding a number of initiatives during FY2016 to address impaired driving including DWI
enforcement teams, checking stations, DWI courts, alcohol interlocks, and expedited blood
testing. North Carolina has a Statewide Impaired Driving Task Force that created an Impaired
Driving Plan that provides a comprehensive strategy for preventing and reducing alcohol-impaired
driving in North Carolina. North Carolina conducted a NHTSA facilitated impaired
driving program assessment during April 2015 and GHSP will work on implementing the
recommendations through this Task Force as well as other means.
Another area of continuing concern is motorcycle rider fatalities. During 2013, motorcycle
fatalities fell slightly from 198 to 189, but motorcyclists now account for 15% of traffic fatalities
in North Carolina – twice the level of 10 years ago (7.3%). One positive finding is the vast
majority of fatally injured motorcyclists in North Carolina were wearing a helmet when they
crashed. In all likelihood, North Carolina would have experienced many more fatalities if the
state did not have a universal helmet law and a high rate of helmet use. To address the growing
problem of motorcycle rider fatalities, GHSP has expanded the “BikeSafe NC” program with a
system of regional coordinators.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
27
As noted above, the number of pedestrians killed decreased in 2013 from 200 in 2012 to 173.
Although crashes involving pedestrians represent only about 1% of the total reported crashes in
North Carolina, pedestrians are highly over-represented in fatal crashes. Pedestrian fatalities
accounted for 14% of all traffic fatalities during the last three years 2011 - 2013. GHSP
continues to consider new approaches to address this growing problem.
Finally, several areas have shown little change in recent years, such as older driver fatalities,
bicyclist fatalities, and seat belt use. The observed belt use rate for drivers and front seat
occupants in 2013 was 88.6%, up slightly from 87.5% in 2012. The most recent observational
survey (conducted in June 2014) found the observed belt use rate had finally surpassed 90% (at
90.6%). Even though seat belt use is now over 90%, GHSP will continue to support proven
countermeasures to increase seat belt use including high visibility enforcement targeting
nighttime belt use and focusing on those counties with the highest numbers of unrestrained
fatalities. North Carolina conducted a NHTSA-facilitated occupant protection program
assessment in July, 2013 and many of the recommendations from this assessment have been
incorporated into a Strategic Plan developed by a Statewide Occupant Protection Task Force.
The table that follows provides a summary of the 17 traffic safety indicators for North Carolina
for the years 2007 to 2013.
Summary of North Carolina Traffic Safety Indicators
Indicator
Year
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Fatalities 1,676 1,428 1,313 1,320 1,230 1,299 1,289
Fatality Rate / 100 million VMT 1.62 1.40 1.28 1.29 1.19 1.24 1.23
Number of "Disabling" (A)
Injuries
3,192 2,769 2,473 2,337 2,424 2,273 2,109
Number of Fatalities Involving
Driver or MC Operator w/ >
.08 BAC
497 423 358 389 359 372 371
Number of Unrestrained
Passenger
Vehicle Occupant Fatalities
541 476 416 415 379 354 355
Number of Speeding-Related
Fatalities
622 474 517 487 476 441 413
Number of Motorcyclist
Fatalities
201 169 154 191 170 198 189
Number of Unhelmeted
Motorcyclist Fatalities
14 14 15 11 11 23 17
Number of Drivers Age 20 or
Younger Involved in Fatal
Crashes
270 227 207 202 176 170 153
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
28
Indicator
Summary of North
2007
Carolina
2008
Traffic Safety Indicators
Year
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Number of Pedestrian
Fatalities
Number of Pedalcyclists Killed
in Crashes
Observed Belt Use by
Passenger Vehicle Drivers &
Right Front Seat Occupants
Seat Belt Citations Issued
172
18
88.8%
160
32
89.8%
146 169 161 200 173
16 23 25 27 22
89.5% 89.7% 89.5% 87.5% 88.6%
During Grant-Funded 57,421 50,704
Enforcement Activities
Impaired Driving Arrests Made
During Grant-Funded 15,303 15,789
Enforcement Activities
Speeding Citations Issued
During Grant-Funded 184,969 175,603
Enforcement Activities
Rural Fatality Rate /100 million
3.19 2.72
VMT
Urban Fatality Rate /100
0.69 0.65
million VMT
49,495 44,700 38,099 40,767 43,543
16,145 16,096 13,833 14,533 13,011
176,100 174,250 147,045 148,561 133,794
2.37 2.36 2.07 2.19 2.12
0.56 0.60 0.62 0.62 0.66
Note: Disabling injury data come from North Carolina Crash Data. Observed belt use comes from North Carolina’s
annual seat belt use survey. Data for enforcement activities is reported directly to GHSP from participating law
enforcement agencies. All other data are from FARS.
NATIONAL COMPARISONS
Although North Carolina has seen improvement in recent years across many of the 17 key
traffic safety indicators, there are several areas where the state lags behind the U.S. as a whole.
The table below shows how North Carolina compares to the nation on a variety of performance
measures. All figures are based on 2013 FARS data except observed belt use (which comes from
the annual seat belt use survey).
Comparison of North Carolina to the U.S., 2013
Performance Measure
North
Carolina
United
States
NC +/-
US
Fatalities per 100 million VMT 1.23 1.09 + 0.14
Fatalities per 100,000 population 13.09 10.35 + 2.74
Alcohol-impaired driving fatalities (BAC = .08+) per 100 million VMT 0.35 0.34 + 0.01
Percent of fatalities with the highest driver BsAC in the crash of .08+ 29% 31% - 2%
Percent of passenger vehicle occupant fatalities who were
unrestrained
34% 39% - 5%
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
29
Performance Measure
Comparison of North Carolina to the U.S., 2013
North
Carolina
United
States
NC +/-
US
Observed belt use by passenger vehicle drivers & right front seat
occupants
89% 87% + 2%
Percent of fatalities that are speed-related 32% 29% + 3%
Percent of motorcyclists killed who were unhelmeted 9% 38% - 29%
Percent of motorcyclists killed with a BAC=.08+ 31% 30% + 1%
Percent of fatalities to persons age 65 and older 17% 17% 0
Pedestrian fatalities per 100,000 population 1.76 1.50 + 0.26
Pedalcyclist fatalities per million population 2.23 2.34 - 0.11
Compared to the U.S., North Carolina has a higher rate of fatalities per capita and per mile
traveled. The percent of speed-related fatalities is also somewhat higher in North Carolina than
the U.S., as is the number of pedestrian fatalities per capita. These are all areas where North
Carolina can improve.
Meanwhile, there are several areas where North Carolina compares quite favorably to the
nation. For example, helmet use among motorcyclists is quite strong in North Carolina.
Additionally, North Carolina has a low percent of fatalities who were unrestrained. These are
strengths upon which North Carolina can build for the future.
COUNTY COMPARISONS
North Carolina is comprised of 100 counties. As would be expected, there are sizeable
differences between individual counties in the occurrence of motor vehicle fatalities. The first
map on the following page shows the total number of fatalities in each of North Carolina’s 100
counties during 2013.
The fifteen counties with the highest number of fatalities in 2013 included Wake (73),
Mecklenburg (67), Cumberland (53), Guilford (44), Robeson (42), Buncombe (35), Davidson
(31), Johnston (28), Forsyth (27), Harnett (27), Rowan (27), Wayne (26), Durham (25), Onslow
(25), and Alamance (23). Not surprisingly, many of these counties are also among the most
populous counties in the state.
The second map on the following page shows the fatality rate per 100,000 population during
2013. Here, the pattern is very different. The counties with the highest fatality rate per capita
tend to be rural counties, primarily in the eastern (coastal) part of the state. This part of the
state is a popular tourist destination. Additionally, the I-95 corridor passes through this region.
Since most of these counties have relatively small populations, even small numbers of fatalities
produce high fatality rates. The counties with the highest rate of fatalities per 100,000
population include Graham (56.47 fatalities per 100,000 population), Bladen (45.44), Columbus
(38.10), Perquimans (36.31), Alleghany (36.19), Swain (34.27), Northampton (32.95), Robeson
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
30
(31.34), Vance (28.85), Beaufort (27.21), Pender (26.99), Anson (26.60), Richmond (26.06),
Mitchell (25.96), and Lee (25.28),
Total Fatalities in North Carolina, by County, 2013
Fatalities in North Carolina per 100,000 Population, by County, 2013
To achieve statewide targets for decreasing motor vehicle fatalities, both the counties with the
highest number of fatalities and the counties with a greater than expected contribution of
fatalities per population must be considered. Each of the individual sections of the Highway
Safety Plan (e.g., alcohol-impaired driving, occupant protection) identify the specific counties in
North Carolina where highway safety problems are most significant.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
31
The table below presents the total number of fatalities and fatalities per 100,000 population
during 2013 for all 100 counties in North Carolina. The table also includes the rank of each
county (with “1” being the most fatalities or highest rate per population). The fatality data
shown in the table are from FARS and the population numbers are from U.S. Census estimates
for 2013.
Fatalities in Motor Vehicle Crashes, by County, 2013
County Population
Fatalities Per100KPop
County Population
Fatalities Per100KPop
# Rank Rate Rank # Rank Rate Rank
Alamance 153,595 23 15 14.97 52 Johnston 177,308 28 8 15.79 45
Alexander 37,436 8 53 21.37 25 Jones 10,554 2 89 18.95 33
Alleghany 11,052 4 76 36.19 5 Lee 59,344 15 28 25.28 15
Anson 26,318 7 59 26.60 12 Lenoir 59,046 7 59 11.86 68
Ashe 27,434 5 68 18.23 36 Lincoln 79,745 12 37 15.05 50
Avery 17,872 2 89 11.19 74 Macon 34,151 4 76 11.71 71
Beaufort 47,777 13 31 27.21 10 Madison 21,372 3 83 14.04 60
Bertie 20,595 5 68 24.28 18 Martin 23,750 5 68 21.05 26
Bladen 35,209 16 27 45.44 2 McDowell 45,231 10 44 22.11 22
Brunswick 115,716 13 31 11.23 73 Mecklenburg 991,867 67 2 6.75 94
Buncombe 248,872 35 6 14.06 59 Mitchell 15,407 4 76 25.96 14
Burke 89,519 9 47 10.05 78 Montgomery 27,768 4 76 14.41 54
Cabarrus 186,457 19 24 10.19 77 Moore 91,937 9 47 9.79 81
Caldwell 82,504 8 53 9.70 82 Nash 94,744 21 20 22.16 21
Camden 10,174 1 94 9.83 80 New Hanover 213,809 18 25 8.42 87
Carteret 69,239 8 53 11.55 72 Northampton 21,244 7 59 32.95 7
Caswell 23,844 2 89 8.39 88 Onslow 193,925 25 13 12.89 64
Catawba 155,411 21 20 13.51 62 Orange 139,694 15 28 10.74 76
Chatham 67,620 12 37 17.75 37 Pamlico 13,071 2 89 15.30 49
Cherokee 27,471 6 64 21.84 24 Pasquotank 39,458 0 95 0.00 95
Chowan 14,815 0 95 0.00 95 Pender 55,568 15 28 26.99 11
Clay 10,794 2 89 18.53 35 Perquimans 13,771 5 68 36.31 4
Cleveland 97,429 8 53 8.21 90 Person 39,192 6 64 15.31 48
Columbus 57,739 22 17 38.10 3 Pitt 173,879 21 20 12.08 67
Craven 104,421 17 26 16.28 41 Polk 20,603 5 68 24.27 19
Cumberland 332,553 53 3 15.94 44 Randolph 142,561 22 17 15.43 47
Currituck 24,506 4 76 16.32 40 Richmond 46,041 12 37 26.06 13
Dare 35,273 7 59 19.85 29 Robeson 134,010 42 5 31.34 8
Davidson 163,770 31 7 18.93 34 Rockingham 92,254 13 31 14.09 58
Davie 41,507 4 76 9.64 83 Rowan 138,666 27 9 19.47 30
Duplin 60,104 9 47 14.97 53 Rutherford 67,807 11 42 16.22 42
Durham 286,053 25 13 8.74 85 Sampson 64,313 13 31 20.21 28
Edgecombe 55,704 8 53 14.36 55 Scotland 36,223 9 47 24.85 17
Forsyth 360,471 27 9 7.49 93 Stanly 60,612 10 44 16.50 39
Franklin 62,697 12 37 19.14 32 Stokes 46,731 9 47 19.26 31
Gaston 209,571 23 15 10.97 75 Surry 73,344 11 42 15.00 51
Gates 11,880 3 83 25.25 16 Swain 14,590 5 68 34.27 6
Graham 8,854 5 68 56.47 1 Transylvania 33,220 3 83 9.03 84
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
32
Fatalities in Motor Vehicle Crashes, by County, 2013
County
Granville
Greene
Guilford
Halifax
Harnett
Haywood
Henderson
Hertford
Hoke
Hyde
Iredell
Jackson
Fatalities
Population
# Rank
57,910 8 53
21,073 3 83
507,419 44 4
53,705 12 37
123,316 27 9
59,674 7 59
109,287 9 47
24,621 3 83
50,672 6 64
5,806 0 95
164,974 22 17
40,810 5 68
Per100KPop
County
Rate Rank
13.81 61 Tyrrell
14.24 57 Union
8.67 86 Vance
22.34 20 Wake
21.89 23 Warren
11.73 70 Washington
8.24 89 Watauga
12.18 66 Wayne
11.84 69 Wilkes
0.00 95 Wilson
13.34 63 Yadkin
12.25 65 Yancey
TOTAL
Fatalities Per100KPop
Population
# Rank Rate Rank
4,143 0 95 0.00 95
211,539 21 20 9.93 79
45,056 13 31 28.85 9
964,616 73 1 7.57 92
20,453 0 95 0.00 95
12,826 0 95 0.00 95
52,682 4 76 7.59 91
125,101 26 12 20.78 27
69,754 10 44 14.34 56
81,397 13 31 15.97 43
38,131 6 64 15.74 46
17,921 3 83 16.74 38
9,861,952 1,289 -- 13.07 --
PROGRAM TARGETS
North Carolina’s Highway Safety targets are presented in the table below. The targets
established for the individual program areas are also provided in subsequent sections of the
report.
Summary of North Carolina Traffic Safety Targets for FY2016
Program Area Target(s)
Overall targets Reduce traffic-related fatalities by 20 percent from the
2009-2013 average of 1,290 to 1,032 by December 31,
2016.
Reduce the fatality rate per 100 million VMT by 20 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 1.25 to 1.0 by December
31, 2016.
Reduce the number of serious injuries by 20 percent from
the 2009-2013 average of 2,323 to 1,859 by December 31,
2016.
Alcohol-impaired Driving Decrease alcohol impaired driving fatalities 20 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 370 to 296 by December
31, 2016.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
33
Summary of North Carolina Traffic Safety Targets for FY2016
Program Area Target(s)
Occupant Protection Decrease unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant
fatalities in all seating positions 25 percent from the 2009-
2013 average of 384 to 288 by December 31, 2016.
Increase statewide observed seat belt use of front seat
outboard occupants in passenger vehicles 2 percentage
point(s) from the 2010-2014 average usage rate of 89.0
percent to 92.0 percent by December 31, 2016
Police Traffic Services Reduce speeding-related fatalities by 25 percent from the
2009-2013 average of 467 to 350 by December 31, 2016
Young Drivers Decrease drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal
crashes 25 percent from the 2009-2013 average of 182 to
137 by December 31, 2016.
Motorcycles Decrease motorcyclist fatalities 20 percent from the 2009-
2013 average of 180 to 144 by December 31, 2016.
Decrease unhelmeted motorcyclist fatalities 15 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 15 to 13 by December 31,
2016.
Older Drivers Decrease the number of older drivers involved in fatal
crashes 10 percent from the 2009-2013 average of 197 to
169 by December 31, 2016.
Pedestrians Decrease the number of pedestrian fatalities 20 percent
from the 2009-2013 average of 170 to 136 by December
31, 2016.
Bicyclists Decrease the number of bicyclist fatalities 20 percent from
the 2009-2013 average of 23 to 18 by December 31, 2016.
Traffic Records Provide direction and facilitate coordination among the
safety data stewards and stakeholders to improve the
transportation safety information systems in North
Carolina through on-going Traffic Records Coordinating
Committee activities.
ALIGNMENT OF TARGETS WITH THE NC STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN
The State of North Carolina revised its Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) during 2014 and
released the final version in March 2015. The goals stated in the SHSP are to cut the fatalities
and serious injuries in North Carolina in half by 2030; that is, reducing the total annual fatalities
by 630 and the total number of serious injuries by 1,055.
FY2016 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
34
As required by MAP-21, the targets for fatalities, fatality rate / 100 million VMT, and for the
number of "disabling" (A) injuries of this FY2016 GHSP Highway Safety Plan have been aligned
with the goals of the North Carolina Strategic Highway Safety Plan. When trend lines are
generated for these traffic safety indicators, North Carolina is on track to achieve the goals of
the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan of cutting total fatalities from 1,260 to 630, cutting the
fatality rate per million VMT from 1.23 to 0.62, and cutting the number of disabling injuries
from 2,109 to 1,054 by 2030.
The goals of the Plan will be achieved through the implementation of strategies and actions in
nine safety emphasis areas:
1. Demographic Considerations (in particular—older drivers and younger drivers)
2. Driving While Impaired
3. Emerging Issues and Data
4. Intersection Safety
5. Keeping Drivers Alert
6. Lane Departure
7. Occupant Protection/Motorcycles
8. Pedestrians and Bicyclists
9. Speed
It was determined that these emphasis areas represent the greatest opportunity for safety
stakeholders to focus their efforts to achieve the goals of the SHSP. The safety stakeholders
selected these emphasis areas cooperatively through a data-driven approach and noted that
many individual crashes can be attributed to more than one emphasis area.
As noted, the North Carolina Strategic Highway Safety Plan only included specific goals for three
measures. The next page includes a letter signed by Kevin Lacy, Chief Traffic Engineer for the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), indicating the goals of the FY2016 GHSP
Highway Safety Plan support the goals for the NC Strategic Highway Safety Plan, in accordance
with MAP-21 requirements for FY2016, and that NCDOT approves the targets (i.e., goals) laid
out in the FY2016 Highway Safety Plan.
FY2015 Highway Safety Plan • North Carolina Governor’s Highway Safety Program
www.ncdot.gov/programs/ghsp
Performance Measures
35
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENf OF TRANSPORIXIlON
PAr MCCRORY Ai;(1o LOCAnON:
1~AN